> You are right, however, I was talking about the country itself, not peopl=
e
> feelings.

You are supporting EXACTLY the point I was making.

> While no doubt made in good faith,
> and an eye to what some historians
> will tell you, and what Wikipedia and/or other sources may say,
....
> ... the SU never had any more right to the Baltic Republics
> than to any other disputed state.

Unlike the other parts of the SU that I am aware of, the inclusion of
the Baltic States had (even more) questionable merit or (even less)
legal defence. Which was the point that I was making,.
Their cases stand out quite clearly from those of other parts of the union.

> Borders are always matter of internationally accepted facts

lacking here

> (as opposed to claims of occupancy)
> and Soviet Union was accepted by pretty much everyone around the world

no

> This was pretty much the map by that time:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Bloc

That's pretty funny in a sad sort of way given

> and an eye to what some historians
> will tell you, and what Wikipedia and/or other sources may say,

That was exactly part of my point.

For another wiki type other view (with the mouse roaring) see

           http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Lithuanian_invasion_of_Poland_(=
1939)

There are many more such with all sorts of shades of perspective. But
the red inked map of our classrooms may not have found a complete
match in reality.

Then there's Balochistan ... :-) (home of the Baluchitherium)(believed
to be the largest land mammal ever.)



   R
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.