Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 70

Thread: Last of the Romanovs

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member Catalpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Dublin West
    Posts
    10,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Last of the Romanovs

    It looks probable that the last of the Romanovs executed in 1918 by the Bolsheviks have now been located.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/articl ... 04,00.html

    Was this an unjustified act of murder or a brutal but necessary Act of War?

    At least it stopped the emergence of a Royal rival to Soviet rule overseas that could have dragged on for years…

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    213
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Re: Last of the Romanovs

    Quote Originally Posted by Catalpa
    It looks probable that the last of the Romanovs executed in 1918 by the Bolsheviks have now been located.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/articl ... 04,00.html

    Was this an unjustified act of murder or a brutal but necessary Act of War?
    The murder of children is never justified. The youngest was a 14 year old boy with a serious illness. How could that ever be justified?


  3. #3

    Default

    They would have been used to undermine the revolution from abroad. The Brits and French would have done so without a doubt. Sad but understandable.
    Kylie never answers my calls

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member Catalpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Dublin West
    Posts
    10,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Re: Last of the Romanovs

    Quote Originally Posted by Insider2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Catalpa
    It looks probable that the last of the Romanovs executed in 1918 by the Bolsheviks have now been located.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/articl ... 04,00.html

    Was this an unjustified act of murder or a brutal but necessary Act of War?
    The murder of children is never justified. The youngest was a 14 year old boy with a serious illness. How could that ever be justified?

    If it avoided further bloodshed within the territories of the Old Empire.

    Octavian did the same thing to Caesar's son Caesarion IIRC he was about 10 when he was dispatched.

    The lesser of evils?

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    213
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boldfenianman
    They would have been used to undermine the revolution from abroad. The Brits and French would have done so without a doubt. Sad but understandable.
    Except that there still were, and still are, Romanovs. Just because they executed Nicolas II and Mikhail II did not end the family. There still was a pretender to the throne. Indeed there still is today. A seriously ill 14 year old would have been no use whatsoever to counterrevolutionaries. Given his precarious health he was likely to die at any time. In any case Nicholas II had abdicated on his own and his children's behalfs, so none of them from February 1917 were eligible to the throne. The actual claimant was Nicholas's brother Mikhail, known sometimes as Mikhail II because he initially accepted the throne. So in killing the ex-Tsar, ex-Tsaritsa and their children they were doing a pointless act as traditionalists no longer regarded them as Tsar and Tsaritsa. It was Mikhail II who was the threat but he too was killed.

  6. #6

    Default

    Price Michael of Kent is a Romanov

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    massachusetts
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Insider. The communists killed 60 million of their own so talking about a 14 year old as being unjustified brings Stalins retort of tradegy versus statistic to mind. Correct me if I am wrong but did not the Brits refuse to bring the family out so that the Whites would continue the war. there is also a conspiracy theory that the Romanovs had a 20 million gold ounces stashed in the Rockefeller bank in NYC. Some believe that this bought their escape and some believe it did not. All believe that Rockefeller got the gold.

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    34,250
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boldfenianman
    They would have been used to undermine the revolution from abroad. The Brits and French would have done so without a doubt. Sad but understandable.
    A preemptive strike. Didn't Bush do the same thing and people got all upset over that. Though I guess the Bolsheviks didn't have that pesky Article 51 to deal with.
    Happiness is a dry martini and a good woman … or a bad woman.
    –George Burns

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    34,250
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Also didn't they kill the family's servants too? They were hardly a threath to the revolution. Murder, plain and simple.
    Happiness is a dry martini and a good woman … or a bad woman.
    –George Burns

  10. #10

    Default

    Both the queen and Prince Phillip are related by blood to the Romanovs. Indeed Phil supplied a DNA sample fairly recently when some old Romanov corpse was found. Isnt Phil the queens cousin? Both descended from Victoria? Wasnt Diana Charles second cousin? Inbred bunch.
    Kylie never answers my calls

Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •