New information from Iraq - Page 4

Wagner · #31 06-25-2007, 10:09 PM

The Czar got screwed on that deal as well. Nicholas was not the problem....SOCIALISM and corruption was...sorry

Lenin, what a winner

Quote:

The bodies of Nicholas and his family, after being soaked in acid and burned, were long believed to have been disposed of down a mineshaft at a site called the Four Brothers. Initially, this was true — they had indeed been disposed of there on the night of July 17. The following morning — when rumours spread in Yekaterinburg regarding the disposal site — Yurovsky removed the bodies and concealed them elsewhere. When the vehicle carrying the bodies broke down on the way to the next chosen site, Yurovsky made new arrangements, and buried most of the bodies in a sealed and concealed pit on Koptyaki Road, a cart track (now abandoned) 12 miles north of Yekaterinburg. The remains of all the family and their retainers with the exception of two of the children were later found in 1991 and reburied by the Russian government following a state funeral. The process to identify the remains was exhaustive. Samples were sent to Britain and the United States for DNA testing. The tests concluded that five of the skeletons were members of one family and four were unrelated. Three of the five were determined to be the children of two parents. The mother was linked to the British royal family, as was Alexandra. (Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, grandson of Alexandra's oldest sister Victoria, Marchioness of Milford-Haven, gave a DNA sample which matched with that of the remains) The father was determined to be related to Grand Duke George Alexandrovich, younger brother of Nicholas II. British scientists said they were more than 98.5% sure that the remains were those of the Emperor, his family and their attendants. Relics from the Ōtsu Scandal (a failed assassination attempt on Tsarevich Nicholas (future Nicholas II) in Japan) failed to provide sufficient evidence due to contamination.

rebound...didn't you know that all military personnel were incompetent of making their own decisions or forming an idea without guidance of a superior officer?

Sponsored Links

rebound · #32 06-25-2007, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WagnerX5

rebound...didn't you know that all military personnel were incompetent of making their own decisions or forming an idea without guidance of a superior officer?

I just find Eric's hypocrisy interesting. He's the first to go running to mommy when he's offended by the truth, I mean a personal attack. Apparently it's ok for him to make them, though. Shocking.

Eric5273 · #33 06-25-2007, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WagnerX5

The Czar got screwed on that deal as well. Nicholas was not the problem....SOCIALISM and corruption was...sorry

Lenin, what a winner

Ummm...what are you talking about? I don't know what version of Russian history you have learned....

There was no socialism prior to 1917. Russia was 100% capitalist, much more capitalist than we are here in the US. There was no welfare, there was no social programs of any kind. There was not even a public education system. Only private schools for the wealthy who could afford it. The wealthy elite landowners owned 99.9% of the wealth, and everyone else was poor, illiterate/uneducated and starving to death. Kind of like Mexico or much of Africa is today. Russia was a third world country, only about 40 years removed from Feudalism.

And I do indeed know this, because my family came from there during that period. Things were terrible there.

As for Lenin, he and his people were pushing for democracy for more than a decade before 1917. In 1907 the Czar finally gave in and allowed for democratic reforms, and a parlament was elected. But a couple of years later, the Czar got fed up at the laws they were passing, and he disolved the parlament and banned democracy. Then when he entered Russia into a very unpopular war (WWI) and too many Russian kids started coming back in body bags, the public got even more angry.

Lenin was more popular among the Russian public than George Washington was here during the American revolution. If he had lived, things surely would have been different. But he died in 1925, while they were still fighting a war against the US & Britain. His logical successor was supposed to be Trotsky. But a coup took place and Stalin seized power. Trotsky and his people (i.e. Lenin's people) fled the country and never returned. Trotsky was later murdered by the KGB.

rebound · #34 06-25-2007, 11:24 PM

You got a Hemi in that dodge?

Wagner · #35 06-26-2007, 05:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

Ummm...what are you talking about? I don't know what version of Russian history you have learned....

There was no socialism prior to 1917. Russia was 100% capitalist, much more capitalist than we are here in the US. There was no welfare, there was no social programs of any kind. There was not even a public education system. Only private schools for the wealthy who could afford it. The wealthy elite landowners owned 99.9% of the wealth, and everyone else was poor, illiterate/uneducated and starving to death. Kind of like Mexico or much of Africa is today. Russia was a third world country, only about 40 years removed from Feudalism.

And I do indeed know this, because my family came from there during that period. Things were terrible there.

As for Lenin, he and his people were pushing for democracy for more than a decade before 1917. In 1907 the Czar finally gave in and allowed for democratic reforms, and a parlament was elected. But a couple of years later, the Czar got fed up at the laws they were passing, and he disolved the parlament and banned democracy. Then when he entered Russia into a very unpopular war (WWI) and too many Russian kids started coming back in body bags, the public got even more angry.

Lenin was more popular among the Russian public than George Washington was here during the American revolution. If he had lived, things surely would have been different. But he died in 1925, while they were still fighting a war against the US & Britain. His logical successor was supposed to be Trotsky. But a coup took place and Stalin seized power. Trotsky and his people (i.e. Lenin's people) fled the country and never returned. Trotsky was later murdered by the KGB.

Ah, Hitler was popular with the people as well, guess we should have left him there. And I like to pay attention to the non popular belief (history is written by the winner). Love how you used coup when Stalin took over but not when the Czar was kicked out an murdered. Nice choice.

Kind of like US history saying Battle when we beat the Native Americans in a conflict ans slaughter when we lost.

Sponsored Links