POLAND AND RUSSIA HAVE CONFLICTING STRATEGIC INTERESTS (Ukraine)

Russia is only too happy about Georgian sovereignty, believe me. It would be even happier if Georgia were to be sovereign and far from Russian borders. No such luck...

You fail to grasp that all this petty squabbling is the part of a strategy, and this strategy is not of Russia's making. Some people in Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine decided that anti-Russian stance would give them free ride to NATO and EU and that Western nations will be happy to provide for them as a devoted allies against Russia. As a final touch, smart people also built a couple of Potemkin villages called development of democracy and freedom. Western media are delighted to see young democracies freeing themselves from Russian "control". The best-case scenario for them is if Russia could be provoked to do something stupid, and Putin and his government are far from being the smartest guys around. Very simple. And they have reasons to believe they would succeed, this way has been paved already by Poland and Baltic states.

So when you decide to blast Russia again just understand that you are being used. And prepare to pay; these guys really cannot survive without living off somebody. They will be your best friends...while you pay. Good luck :-))

Maybe Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine would not have an anti-Russian stance if Russia stopped trying to impose her will over these nations.

I am really tired of repeating the same all over again. The only thing Russia wants to "impose" on all those nations is for them to be reasonably friendly to Russia as their neighbor. No more, no less.

The only thing Russia wants to "impose" on all those nations is for them to be reasonably friendly to Russia as their neighbor. No more, no less.

hehe only sometimes wanted to „impose” presidents and troops (just details)

You are right but partially. Abhazies are ortodox christians partly and smaller partly muslims and osetians are ortodox christians fully. On territory of Abkhazia the New Aphone Monastery are located. It is the holy place for ortodox christians.
Georgians are partly christians too with thier own church and smaller partly muslims.

Russian troops were not involved until georgians began to shell russian military base in Gudauta. From this moment russain army began to fire on georgians. Reciprocally.
Georgians do not deny that they shelled base first hand but say that base sold (or just gave) weaponry to abkhazies. Probably true.

SO it was mess. And Basaev was involved in it. It was before war in Chechnya so no one knew what will happen.

Later if you know same georgians widely helped chechens to fight russian army. SO not only russians you may rebuke if to be fair.

Maybe Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine would not have an anti-Russian stance==

Georgia and Moldova one case. Ukraine - another.

Ukraine doesn't have anti-russian stance. Same as Russia - anti-ukranian. It is just family matter, some small brawl.
Today there only small minority of pure russians or pure ukranians in the world.
For example, the father of madam Yulia is russian. I'm not sure but I red mother of mister "leper" himself is russian too.
They both speak russian better then thier ukranian dialect. I heard them both on interview.
SO go figure:)).

Lukasz--where the Soviet Russian POW's were kept then ? In Private Polish homes ?

In my father's village near Lomza there was one Russian ex-POW for that example. From what he said it was not uncommon at that time. This man escaped from Red Army and made his living feeding pigs of local people.

Surely there were such stories too. But those Red Army soldiers captured on the battlefield were initially housed in Polish POW Camps.

"I think that the situation when the internationally recognized borders are unjust is far more dangerous. "

Well with all due respect to your good natured proposals, I'm going to keep on playing a guessing game. Who'll decide when internationally recognized borders are just and when they are not ? Based on what criteria ? Is it History, language, culture, religion, ethnicity or something else ? Is it an Ancient History or more recent one ?

One of the Adolf Hitler stepping stones to power was the claims that Versaille treaty carving up parts of Germany to France, Czechoslovakia or Poland was "unjust" partitioning of German Nation. Islam believes that all the world should be Islamic and if the land that was previously under Islamic rule and then ceased to be (like Spain), this land was "stolen" from Islam. Previously "just" borders can become "unjust" overtime due to immigration. Example--Islamic immigration into Europe. Many Muslim immigrants and their descendants simply don't assimilate into the traditional cultures of Britain, France, Germany, etc. and complain about discrimination from Native populations. Should the Islamic anclaves in Europe be given autonomies then rendering the current European borders obsolete or unjust ? Or should native British, French, Germans, etc, demand that Muslim Immigrants and their descendants assimilate or leave ? What would be just in this case ?

Poland joins Iran's ardent gas customers

Who'll decide when internationally recognized borders are just and when they are not

When there is a nation living on a solid territory where it is a majority, and the majority of this nation wants to be independent - we should recognize their right to independence.

Is it History, language, culture, religion, ethnicity or something else ? Is it an Ancient History or more recent one

No, it is only the will of the people who live there. For example: the Basques are a minority in the Basque country (I don't know BTW why Madrid doesn't want to make a referendum on the sovereignty in this country- it would have won it easily), so they don't have a right to sovereignty. The same with Russians in Estonia, Hungarians in Slovakia, Mexicans in New Mexico and Dakotas in Dakota.

On the other hand, where there are two (Canada) or more nations(Switzerland) living together, and they have nothing against it - it is OK.

Should the Islamic anclaves in Europe be given autonomies then rendering the current European borders obsolete or unjust ?

I'm not talking about some ghettos, or enclaves, but about vast and solid areas inhabited by an ethnic majority (like Chechnya), or a majority of people that wants independence (like Taiwan). The secession of the 11 southern states of the USA in 1860 was a different case, beacause it was about slavery. If there was no slavery in the South, wouldn't you say that the North was an unjustly occupying power? .
I'm just saying that the right to secession is a basic human right.

One of the Adolf Hitler stepping stones to power was the claims that Versaille treaty carving up parts of Germany to France, Czechoslovakia or Poland was "unjust" partitioning of German Nation.

But he was wrong. The Germans in Poland and in Czechoslovakia were a minority. So he was unjust.

Besides, Im only saying that, where there is an ethnic conflict (like in Chechnya) we should judge it by the rule of the will of the nation.