The "relevance" was relating to your unusual seriousness with which you
referred to Soviet maps. As I skip 99% of your stories, you are well invited
to skip all of mine!
Looking forward to more grumbling gibberish,
Wolfgang
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von:
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com]Im Auftrag von aletheiak
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. Oktober 2005 14:04
An:
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
Betreff: [BoundaryPoint] Re: but yikes afcntj looks to be off peak now
too
thanx for your kind wishes wolfgang
tho i have to note the rest of your response is oranges to my apples
as i was asking about the fully accepted common tripoint of 3 independent
countries
only one of which is even a postsoviet republic
& you are answering here about internal soviet & postsoviet borders &
disorders
while singing admittedly wretched old tunes well worth skipping again in
their own right
even if they hadnt been irrelevant to my question & our common topic
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Wolfgang Schaub"
<Wolfgang.Schaub@c...>
wrote:
>
> "What is the truth here"? You allude to a common feature of Soviet - and
> also "modern" Russian management of bordes/boundaries: Nobody knows for
> sure. In addition: Borders are shifted per ???? - Ukáz - decree, in
> Stalinistic times sometimes in the form of a telegram without previous
> announcements/consultation; you can imagine how "accurate" these were.
>
> A nice example is offered by the ongoing quarrel between Ingushetiya and
> North-Ossetia over the Progorodnyj district, where borders have repeatedly
> been shifted back and forth so often that the local people decided to
ignore
> all this and start fighting against each other. You may also refer to
> http://www.ingush.ru/d.asp where all this misery is displayed in splendor.
>
> Right now discussions are going on in the Duma to reduce the number of
> Russian "subjects" by combining some of them to greater units, in order to
> minimize administration costs. You may wonder if this does not mean
breaking
> up wounds of old ethnic disputes, rather than helping to solve a problem.
>
> Typical is also the kind of treatment that the Russians give to the
Georgian
> border. Repeatedly in the recent past the Russians have shifted the border
> stepwise to the South, in increments of 100 metres or so, i.e. in
increments
> small enough not to arouse international clashes, but effective enough on
> the other hand since the Georgian side is unable to offer resistance.
>
> Good luck in analyzing ols Soviet maps!
>
> Wolfgang
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com]Im Auftrag von aletheia kallos
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 25. Oktober 2005 23:42
> An: boundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Betreff: [BoundaryPoint] but yikes afcntj looks to be off peak now too
>
>
> this soviet topo shows the former afcnsu
> which is now afcntj
> 20 meters lower than & several hundred meters away
> from the peak of mt povalo shveikovski
> http://sunsite.berkeley.edu:8085/tajikistan/100k/10-43-102.jpg
>
> but all 3 treaties specify the summit itself & far
> different elevations
> http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/LimitsinSeas/IBS089.pdf
> page 4
> http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/LimitsinSeas/IBS026.pdf
> pages 12 & 16
> including an apparent mention of a marker
> &
> http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/LimitsinSeas/IBS064.pdf
> page 16
>
> the variety in the elevations of up to 175 meters is
> not so disturbing as the apparently even greater
> displacement from the known summit point
>
> but what is the truth here
> & why all this discrepancy
>
> & how far can we trust these soviet maps anyway
> oops
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
Yahoo! Groups Links