Interesting and Humour - page 3194

You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Because there is such a thing as national culture.
There's a rule for any viable culture: "It was yours and now it's ours."
Oh... and here I thought it was about the thugs. The national culture is made up of different elements.
Exactly. After all, they write "ancient city of the Sumerians", even though the Sumerian state did not exist a long time ago.
No, Andrei, I am not amused. I am rather saddened by the fact that you do not even try to understand simple and obvious things:
Koenigsberg is an ancient Prussian town, which became Soviet in 45 (legally), and Russian in 91 (also legally).
But it did not become ancient Russian.
And once again I will repeat my question (although I asked it not to you, but to Alexander Saprykin):
If tomorrow, for instance, Uzbekistan becomes part of Russia, are you also ready to call Samarkand an ancient Russian town?
Königsberg is a German city, and before it was German it was Prussian and had a different name.
For example, in Uzbekistan, why do you not have a question about Kazan, for example? Kazan is the capital of Tatarstan, which is part of Russia. And this city is also on the coins of Ancient Cities of Russia. That Kazan is not a Russian city?
Königsberg is a German city, and before it was German it was Prussian and had a different name.
For example, in Uzbekistan, why do you not have a question about Kazan, for example? Kazan is the capital of Tatarstan, which is part of Russia. And this city is also on the coins of Ancient Cities of Russia. That Kazan is not a Russian city?
It is Russian. Conquered by Ivan the Terrible in 1552.
Koenigsberg is a German city, and before it was German it was Prussian and had a different name.
For example, in Uzbekistan, why do you not have a question about Kazan, for example? Kazan is the capital of Tatarstan, which is part of Russia. And this city is also on the coins of Ancient Cities of Russia. That Kazan is not a Russian city?
massively relocated beyond the walls of Kazan's wooden settlement, to the swampy shores of Lake Kaban, laying the foundation for the Old Tatar Settlement of Kazan.
Thus, more than 400 years of Russian history give Kazan the right to call Kazan an ancient Russian (or, more correctly, Tatar-Russian) city.
I do not have a question about Kazan, as Kazan became part of Russia in 1552. From 1556 mass resettlement of Russian people in Kazan, and the Kazan Tartars
massively relocated beyond the walls of Kazan's wooden settlement, to the swampy shores of Lake Kaban, laying the foundation for the Old Tatar Settlement of Kazan.
Thus, more than 400 years of Russian history give Kazan the right to call Kazan an ancient Russian (or more correctly, Tatar-Russian) city.
And 70 years of Russian history of Kaliningrad does not give you the right? You have a double standard, however. For some people, even this period is already ancient.