New Greek elections

[Shofercia]

World War 2 was started by Nazi Germany and Soviet Union. Molotov Ribbentrop pact. WW2 started with an attack on Poland!

I don't know much about Franco besides he was Spanish.

That's factually incorrect. The M-R Pact was a secret pact. Nazis attacked Poland on September 1st, 1939. Soviets took no action until weeks later. It's universally accepted that Nazis started WWII. Not Soviets. Stop with the revisionist crap, it's getting old. Stalin wasn't out to go for Poland. He just didn't want Hitler coming for the USSR. He hoped, (rightly as it turns out,) that an attack on Poland would push Nazi Germany into a war with France & UK. What Stalin didn't realize was that Brits would consider running away from Nazis really fast, a miracle, (Miracle of Dunkirk,) and that France would fall so quickly. On top of everything else, UK and France declared war on Nazi Germany for the attack on Poland. Not on the USSR.

[CTALNH]

World War 2 was started by Nazi Germany and Soviet Union. Molotov Ribbentrop pact. WW2 started with an attack on Poland!

I don't know much about Franco besides he was Spanish.

That's factually incorrect. The M-R Pact was a secret pact. Nazis attacked Poland on September 1st, 1939. Soviets took no action until weeks later. It's universally accepted that Nazis started WWII. Not Soviets. Stop with the revisionist crap, it's getting old. Stalin wasn't out to go for Poland. He just didn't want Hitler coming for the USSR. He hoped, (rightly as it turns out,) that an attack on Poland would push Nazi Germany into a war with France & UK. What Stalin didn't realize was that Brits would consider running away from Nazis really fast, a miracle, (Miracle of Dunkirk,) and that France would fall so quickly. On top of everything else, UK and France declared war on Nazi Germany for the attack on Poland. Not on the USSR.

He only attacked Poland because he need buffer land between him and Germany.

[Teemant]

World War 2 was started by Nazi Germany and Soviet Union. Molotov Ribbentrop pact. WW2 started with an attack on Poland!

I don't know much about Franco besides he was Spanish.

That's factually incorrect. The M-R Pact was a secret pact. Nazis attacked Poland on September 1st, 1939. Soviets took no action until weeks later. It's universally accepted that Nazis started WWII. Not Soviets. Stop with the revisionist crap, it's getting old. Stalin wasn't out to go for Poland. He just didn't want Hitler coming for the USSR. He hoped, (rightly as it turns out,) that an attack on Poland would push Nazi Germany into a war with France & UK. What Stalin didn't realize was that Brits would consider running away from Nazis really fast, a miracle, (Miracle of Dunkirk,) and that France would fall so quickly. On top of everything else, UK and France declared war on Nazi Germany for the attack on Poland. Not on the USSR.

Germany and Soviet Union agreed both to attack Poland before Germany attacked Poland so they both started World War 2. Hitler had to push Polish forces east where Soviets would attack them. This was the plan. It's truth like it or not.

[CTALNH]

That's factually incorrect. The M-R Pact was a secret pact. Nazis attacked Poland on September 1st, 1939. Soviets took no action until weeks later. It's universally accepted that Nazis started WWII. Not Soviets. Stop with the revisionist crap, it's getting old. Stalin wasn't out to go for Poland. He just didn't want Hitler coming for the USSR. He hoped, (rightly as it turns out,) that an attack on Poland would push Nazi Germany into a war with France & UK. What Stalin didn't realize was that Brits would consider running away from Nazis really fast, a miracle, (Miracle of Dunkirk,) and that France would fall so quickly. On top of everything else, UK and France declared war on Nazi Germany for the attack on Poland. Not on the USSR.

Germany and Soviet Union agreed both to attack Poland before Germany attacked Poland so they both started World War 2. Hitler had to push Polish forces east where Soviets would attack them. This was the plan. It's truth like it or not.

No its not its a half truth half lie twisted by you.

[Teemant]

Germany and Soviet Union agreed both to attack Poland before Germany attacked Poland so they both started World War 2. Hitler had to push Polish forces east where Soviets would attack them. This was the plan. It's truth like it or not.

No its not its a half truth half lie twisted by you.

They even showed their alliance to the world with Brest-Litovsk military parade. I'm not lying.

[Shofercia]

That's factually incorrect. The M-R Pact was a secret pact. Nazis attacked Poland on September 1st, 1939. Soviets took no action until weeks later. It's universally accepted that Nazis started WWII. Not Soviets. Stop with the revisionist crap, it's getting old. Stalin wasn't out to go for Poland. He just didn't want Hitler coming for the USSR. He hoped, (rightly as it turns out,) that an attack on Poland would push Nazi Germany into a war with France & UK. What Stalin didn't realize was that Brits would consider running away from Nazis really fast, a miracle, (Miracle of Dunkirk,) and that France would fall so quickly. On top of everything else, UK and France declared war on Nazi Germany for the attack on Poland. Not on the USSR.

Germany and Soviet Union agreed both to attack Poland before Germany attacked Poland so they both started World War 2. Hitler had to push Polish forces east where Soviets would attack them. This was the plan. It's truth like it or not.

It seems to me that you're ignoring the facts that I've stated, and continuing to repeat your lies, so let me ask you, bluntly: what day did WWII start?

No its not its a half truth half lie twisted by you.

They even showed their alliance to the world with Brest-Litovsk military parade. I'm not lying.

Yes, you are. They held a military parade after the war was going. Using your "logic", US started the Ossetian War with Georgia, since US helped Georgians to a military troop movement in Tbilisi.

[Teemant]

Germany and Soviet Union agreed both to attack Poland before Germany attacked Poland so they both started World War 2. Hitler had to push Polish forces east where Soviets would attack them. This was the plan. It's truth like it or not.

It seems to me that you're ignoring the facts that I've stated, and continuing to repeat your lies, so let me ask you, bluntly: what day did WWII start?

WW2 started in 1st september 1939 and it was according to plan that BOTH Germany and Soviet Union had previously agreed to do. They were allies in 1939-1941. After attacking Poland they held military parade together.

[Camelza]

Papandreou's new party is a sad excuse of a sociademocratic party. I'm amused that there are still people considering to vote for that failure.
However they could prove valuable allies to a Syriza-led government.

[CTALNH]

Papandreou's new party is a sad excuse of a sociademocratic party. I'm amused that there are still people considering to vote for that failure.
However they could prove valuable allies to a Syriza-led government.

Papadreou is not gonna get into the parliament....

I think and want to believe that his is not gonna get into the parliament.

[Teemant]

Germany and Soviet Union agreed both to attack Poland before Germany attacked Poland so they both started World War 2. Hitler had to push Polish forces east where Soviets would attack them. This was the plan. It's truth like it or not.

It seems to me that you're ignoring the facts that I've stated, and continuing to repeat your lies, so let me ask you, bluntly: what day did WWII start?

They even showed their alliance to the world with Brest-Litovsk military parade. I'm not lying.

Yes, you are. They held a military parade after the war was going. Using your "logic", US started the Ossetian War with Georgia, since US helped Georgians to a military troop movement in Tbilisi.

Maybe you should reprhase your last sentence because I can't understand what you are trying to say. US helped Georgians to a miltiary troop movement? Da f*ck. US evacuated their personnel from Georgia when war started.

And it's hard to convince me that Germany and Soviet Union weren't allies if they then (back in 1939) declared that they are allies. Can't unsay what has been said.

[Camelza]

Yes, you are. They held a military parade after the war was going. Using your "logic", US started the Ossetian War with Georgia, since US helped Georgians to a military troop movement in Tbilisi.

I never got why Russia damaged its image by invading Georgia in the first place, it practically allowed the US and Europe to call Putin a ruthless revanchist autocrat without getting anything in return. Hell, Ossetians and Abkhazians aren't even Russian, or slavic for that matter.

[Camelza]

Papandreou's new party is a sad excuse of a sociademocratic party. I'm amused that there are still people considering to vote for that failure.
However they could prove valuable allies to a Syriza-led government.

Papadreou is not gonna get into the parliament....
I think and want to believe that his is not gonna get into the parliament.

Don't underestimate the stupidity of the average Greek voter.

[Shofercia]

It seems to me that you're ignoring the facts that I've stated, and continuing to repeat your lies, so let me ask you, bluntly: what day did WWII start?

WW2 started in 1st september 1939 and it was according to plan that BOTH Germany and Soviet Union had previously agreed to do. They were allies in 1939-1941. After attacking Poland they held military parade together.

Really? Have you actually read the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact? Or are you merely hoping that if lies are repeated, they'll stick. Why don't you actually read it: http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1939pact.html

Secret Additional Protocol.

Hmm, I wonder what the word "secret" means. I'm willing to bet that it means that the Soviets wanted to keep it secret. And usually people don't start a war by being secret. Let's keep reading, shall we?

In the event of a territorial and political rearrangement of the areas belonging to the Polish state, the spheres of influence of Germany and the U.S.S.R. shall be bounded approximately by the line of the rivers Narev, Vistula and San. The question of whether the interests of both parties make desirable the maintenance of an independent Polish States and how such a state should be bounded can only be definitely determined in the course of further political developments. In any event both Governments will resolve this question by means of a friendly agreement.

That forbids Nazi Germany from going beyond certain boundaries; it also forbids the USSR from going beyond certain boundaries. However, it does not require either power to invade Poland, as you keep on, lyingly, alleging. Reading is fun!

Furthermore, some facts to consider:

On 1 September 1939, Germany invaded Poland under the false pretext that the Poles had carried out a series of sabotage operations against German targets.[59] Two days later, on 3 September, France and United Kingdom, followed by the fully independent Dominions[60] of the British Commonwealth[61]—Australia (3 September), Canada (10 September), New Zealand (3 September), and South Africa (6 September)—declared war on Germany. However, initially the alliance provided limited direct military support to Poland, consisting of a small French attack into the Saarland.[62] The Western Allies also began a naval blockade of Germany, which aimed to damage the country's economy and war effort.[63] Germany responded by ordering U-boat warfare against Allied merchant and war ships, which was to later escalate in the Battle of the Atlantic.
German Panzer I tanks near the city of Bydgoszcz, during the Invasion of Poland, September 1939

On 17 September 1939, after signing a cease-fire with Japan, the Soviets also invaded Poland from the east.

So the USSR, which was not required to invade Poland, only does so after a cease-fire with Japan, after Nazi Germany started WWII and after Nazi Germany was declared on by the Allies. But, according to Teemant, USSR started WWII with Nazi Germany, by promising not to invade certain parts of Poland, before the war began, and proceeded not to invade said parts of Poland. The logical mind leaps required to reach that conclusion are absolutely mind numbing, transcending logic itself. You don't start a war by not attacking a country. That's logic 101.

[Shofercia]

It seems to me that you're ignoring the facts that I've stated, and continuing to repeat your lies, so let me ask you, bluntly: what day did WWII start?




Yes, you are. They held a military parade after the war was going. Using your "logic", US started the Ossetian War with Georgia, since US helped Georgians to a military troop movement in Tbilisi.

Maybe you should reprhase your last sentence because I can't understand what you are trying to say. US helped Georgians to a miltiary troop movement? Da f*ck. US evacuated their personnel from Georgia when war started.

By flying them into Georgia? That's certainly an interesting conclusion to reach.

http://archive.armytimes.com/article/20 ... -from-Iraq

The U.S. Air Force brought all 2,000 Georgian troops home from Iraq aboard C-17 Globemasters Sunday and Monday after the Georgian government recalled the troops to combat the advance of Russian troops into the country, said Lt. Gen. Gary North, commander of U.S. Air Forces Central.

So remember guys, when Teemant says "US evacuated their personnel in from Georgia" he actually means "US flew in Georgian troops using American personnel".

And it's hard to convince me that Germany and Soviet Union weren't allies if they then (back in 1939) declared that they are allies. Can't unsay what has been said.

Here's the treaty: http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1939pact.html

Show me where it says that USSR and Nazi Germany are allies. It's a non-aggression pact. It's not an alliance.

[Teemant]

WW2 started in 1st september 1939 and it was according to plan that BOTH Germany and Soviet Union had previously agreed to do. They were allies in 1939-1941. After attacking Poland they held military parade together.

Really? Have you actually read the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact? Or are you merely hoping that if lies are repeated, they'll stick. Why don't you actually read it: http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1939pact.html

Secret Additional Protocol.

Hmm, I wonder what the word "secret" means. I'm willing to bet that it means that the Soviets wanted to keep it secret. And usually people don't start a war by being secret. Let's keep reading, shall we?

In the event of a territorial and political rearrangement of the areas belonging to the Polish state, the spheres of influence of Germany and the U.S.S.R. shall be bounded approximately by the line of the rivers Narev, Vistula and San. The question of whether the interests of both parties make desirable the maintenance of an independent Polish States and how such a state should be bounded can only be definitely determined in the course of further political developments. In any event both Governments will resolve this question by means of a friendly agreement.

That forbids Nazi Germany from going beyond certain boundaries; it also forbids the USSR from going beyond certain boundaries. However, it does not require either power to invade Poland, as you keep on, lyingly, alleging. Reading is fun!

Furthermore, some facts to consider:

On 1 September 1939, Germany invaded Poland under the false pretext that the Poles had carried out a series of sabotage operations against German targets.[59] Two days later, on 3 September, France and United Kingdom, followed by the fully independent Dominions[60] of the British Commonwealth[61]—Australia (3 September), Canada (10 September), New Zealand (3 September), and South Africa (6 September)—declared war on Germany. However, initially the alliance provided limited direct military support to Poland, consisting of a small French attack into the Saarland.[62] The Western Allies also began a naval blockade of Germany, which aimed to damage the country's economy and war effort.[63] Germany responded by ordering U-boat warfare against Allied merchant and war ships, which was to later escalate in the Battle of the Atlantic.
German Panzer I tanks near the city of Bydgoszcz, during the Invasion of Poland, September 1939

On 17 September 1939, after signing a cease-fire with Japan, the Soviets also invaded Poland from the east.

So the USSR, which was not required to invade Poland, only does so after a cease-fire with Japan, after Nazi Germany started WWII and after Nazi Germany was declared on by the Allies. But, according to Teemant, USSR started WWII with Nazi Germany, by promising not to invade certain parts of Poland, before the war began, and proceeded not to invade said parts of Poland. The logical mind leaps required to reach that conclusion are absolutely mind numbing, transcending logic itself. You don't start a war by not attacking a country. That's logic 101.

It was secret protocol because if it leaked out that Germany and Soviet Union had divided Europe in two before september 1st then everybody would know that Poland was going to be attacked. It was a surprise attack. I didn't think you were this stupid. You don't reveal plans like this to public.

And Soviet Union sent jews that escaped from Poland as a result of Germany attacking back to Germany as a gesture of friendship. They were allies (political and military) and this can't be denied.

[Camelza]

Maybe you should reprhase your last sentence because I can't understand what you are trying to say. US helped Georgians to a miltiary troop movement? Da f*ck. US evacuated their personnel from Georgia when war started.

By flying them into Georgia? That's certainly an interesting conclusion to reach.

http://archive.armytimes.com/article/20 ... -from-Iraq

The U.S. Air Force brought all 2,000 Georgian troops home from Iraq aboard C-17 Globemasters Sunday and Monday after the Georgian government recalled the troops to combat the advance of Russian troops into the country, said Lt. Gen. Gary North, commander of U.S. Air Forces Central.

So remember guys, when Teemant says "US evacuated their personnel in from Georgia" he actually means "US flew in Georgian troops using American personnel".

And it's hard to convince me that Germany and Soviet Union weren't allies if they then (back in 1939) declared that they are allies. Can't unsay what has been said.

Here's the treaty: http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1939pact.html

Show me where it says that USSR and Nazi Germany are allies. It's a non-aggression pact. It's not an alliance.

Sorry to interrupt your nice conversation, but the thread is called "New Greek elections" not "the Molotov-Ribentropp thread", or the "Georgian War".

[Shofercia]

Yes, you are. They held a military parade after the war was going. Using your "logic", US started the Ossetian War with Georgia, since US helped Georgians to a military troop movement in Tbilisi.

I never got why Russia damaged its image by invading Georgia in the first place, it practically allowed the US and Europe to call Putin a ruthless revanchist autocrat without getting anything in return. Hell, Ossetians and Abkhazians aren't even Russian, or slavic for that matter.

1. Saakashvili attempted to ethnically cleanse Ossetians from South Ossetian, which, if successful, would've inflamed the Caucasian Region, undoing all of the progress the Russians made there since 2002. Remember, it's an integrated region, meaning that what happens in South Caucasus affects the Russian North Caucasus.

2. Ossetians and Russians have been allies longer than US existed. Forsaking that alliance is a huge no-no.

3. Russian Peacekeepers were attacked. That's enough for war. If you allow your peacekeepers to be attacked when you can defend them, it simply encourages further attacks.

4. It stabilized the Caucasus Region, and once again ensured that Russia is that region's hegemon; in turn, this simmered down tensions in the Russian North Caucasus, making separatism impractical.

5. There's clear evidence that Saakashvili was the aggressor. He tried something in 2004, failed, heavily invested in his armed forces, (with military expenditures reaching 9% of the GDP,) and tried again in 2008.

I could keep going if you want.

It was secret protocol because if it leaked out that Germany and Soviet Union had divided Europe in two before september 1st then everybody would know that Poland was going to be attacked. It was a surprise attack. I didn't think you were this stupid. You don't reveal plans like this to public.

And Soviet Union sent jews that escaped from Poland as a result of Germany attacking back to Germany as a gesture of friendship. They were allies (political and military) and this can't be denied.

Dividing an area doesn't make you allied. That's a non-aggression pact. That's not an alliance. The secret protocol is still a non-aggression pact. That's still not an alliance. Learn the difference between a non-aggression pact and an alliance, before calling others "stupid". You can keep on repeating that it cannot be denied, like an automaton, but you've yet to show any proof of how it was an alliance, and not an non-aggression pact. If only there was something that would clue us into it, hmm, how about the official name: Treaty of Non-aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

Hmm, that certainly reads like "Non-Aggression Pact" to me. But Teemant sees alliance. Shpies! Shpies everywhere! Halp!

[Shofercia]

Sorry to interrupt your nice conversation, but the thread is called "New Greek elections" not "the Molotov-Ribentropp thread", or the "Georgian War".

Sorry bro, I'll get back on topic, although, you did ask about the Ossetian War

Anyways, I'm rooting for SYRIZA! Who would they bloc with?

[Camelza]

I never got why Russia damaged its image by invading Georgia in the first place, it practically allowed the US and Europe to call Putin a ruthless revanchist autocrat without getting anything in return. Hell, Ossetians and Abkhazians aren't even Russian, or slavic for that matter.

1. Saakashvili attempted to ethnically cleanse Ossetians from South Ossetian, which, if successful, would've inflamed the Caucasian Region, undoing all of the progress the Russians made there since 2002. Remember, it's an integrated region, meaning that what happens in South Caucasus affects the Russian North Caucasus.

2. Ossetians and Russians have been allies longer than US existed. Forsaking that alliance is a huge no-no.

3. Russian Peacekeepers were attacked. That's enough for war. If you allow your peacekeepers to be attacked when you can defend them, it simply encourages further attacks.

4. It stabilized the Caucasus Region, and once again ensured that Russia is that region's hegemon; in turn, this simmered down tensions in the Russian North Caucasus, making separatism impractical.

5. There's clear evidence that Saakashvili was the aggressor. He tried something in 2004, failed, heavily invested in his armed forces, (with military expenditures reaching 9% of the GDP,) and tried again in 2008.

I could keep going if you want.

I can accept the first and third reasons, but I can't sympathise with any government that poses as any region's hegemon.
The second reason is as crappy as suggesting that Greece should aid Serbia during the Yugoslav wars because we are traditional allies since medieval years.

[Camelza]

Sorry to interrupt your nice conversation, but the thread is called "New Greek elections" not "the Molotov-Ribentropp thread", or the "Georgian War".

Sorry bro, I'll get back on topic, although, you did ask about the Ossetian War

I never really read about that war and was curious. Make a thread about it, I'm sure it will be quite popular.

Anyways, I'm rooting for SYRIZA! Who would they bloc with?

ANEL is a certain praliamentary ally, despite huge ideological chasms.
Potami is very close with Syriza on social terms but they're rather unpredictable. They could be counted as Syriza's future allies though.
Dimar is similar to Potami's case, but far more insignificant nowadays as a political force.

[Shofercia]

1. Saakashvili attempted to ethnically cleanse Ossetians from South Ossetian, which, if successful, would've inflamed the Caucasian Region, undoing all of the progress the Russians made there since 2002. Remember, it's an integrated region, meaning that what happens in South Caucasus affects the Russian North Caucasus.

2. Ossetians and Russians have been allies longer than US existed. Forsaking that alliance is a huge no-no.

3. Russian Peacekeepers were attacked. That's enough for war. If you allow your peacekeepers to be attacked when you can defend them, it simply encourages further attacks.

4. It stabilized the Caucasus Region, and once again ensured that Russia is that region's hegemon; in turn, this simmered down tensions in the Russian North Caucasus, making separatism impractical.

5. There's clear evidence that Saakashvili was the aggressor. He tried something in 2004, failed, heavily invested in his armed forces, (with military expenditures reaching 9% of the GDP,) and tried again in 2008.

I could keep going if you want.

I can accept the first and third reasons, but I can't sympathise with any government that poses as any region's hegemon.
The second reason is as crappy as suggesting that Greece should aid Serbia during the Yugoslav wars because we are traditional allies since medieval years.

You kind of need to, if you have no other choice. The region's integrated. Whatever happens in South Caucasus, spills into North Caucasus rather violently. South Ossetians would flee into North Ossetia, which could in turn ricochet on Ingushetia, which in turn could ricochet on Chechnya, would in turn could ricochet on Dagestan. And then it's "shit hits the fan" all over again. And the Russo-Ossetian Alliance is stronger than Greco-Serb, and North Ossetia, (South Ossetia was what Saakashvili attacked,) is a de facto and de jure part of Russia. Also:

Sorry to interrupt your nice conversation, but the thread is called "New Greek elections" not the "Georgian War".

[Camelza]

I can accept the first and third reasons, but I can't sympathise with any government that poses as any region's hegemon.
The second reason is as crappy as suggesting that Greece should aid Serbia during the Yugoslav wars because we are traditional allies since medieval years.

You kind of need to, if you have no other choice. The region's integrated. Whatever happens in South Caucasus, spills into North Caucasus rather violently. South Ossetians would flee into North Ossetia, which could in turn ricochet on Ingushetia, which in turn could ricochet on Chechnya, would in turn could ricochet on Dagestan. And then it's "shit hits the fan" all over again. And the Russo-Ossetian Alliance is stronger than Greco-Serb, and North Ossetia, (South Ossetia was what Saakashvili attacked,) is a de facto and de jure part of Russia. Also:

Sorry to interrupt your nice conversation, but the thread is called "New Greek elections" not the "Georgian War".

I guess you're right. ...in both accounts

[Shofercia]

Sorry bro, I'll get back on topic, although, you did ask about the Ossetian War

I never really read about that war and was curious. Make a thread about it, I'm sure it will be quite popular.

Anyways, I'm rooting for SYRIZA! Who would they bloc with?

ANEL is a certain praliamentary ally, despite huge ideological chasms.
Potami is very close with Syriza on social terms but they're rather unpredictable. They could be counted as Syriza's future allies though.
Dimar is similar to Potami's case, but far more insignificant nowadays as a political force.

I've been asked to write on by quite a few people, but here's the thing: in order to understand that war, you have to understand the Caucasian Region, which is a thread in its own right. And that would take forever to make. The Caucasus has numerous ethnicities, each of whom ruled the region at some point in time, and are extremely proud about it. So I'd have to go into that for context and background. Then I'd have to go into how Imperial Russia vastly improved the region, until it was hit by England in the Great Game. After that, I'd have to talk about the negative effects of Russification. Then the Civil War and Stalin, and that would only bring me up to the 1920's. Then I'd do the regional unity during the Great Patriotic War, followed by Stalin messing up the region, the Khrushevka Reforms, the fall of the USSR, compare that to 1921, and that would bring me to the 1990s. After that - fuck, I could probably write a book

Anyhow, what're the chances of ANEL, Potami and Dimar making it into the government to ally with SYRIZA?

[Camelza]

I never really read about that war and was curious. Make a thread about it, I'm sure it will be quite popular.

ANEL is a certain praliamentary ally, despite huge ideological chasms.
Potami is very close with Syriza on social terms but they're rather unpredictable. They could be counted as Syriza's future allies though.
Dimar is similar to Potami's case, but far more insignificant nowadays as a political force.

I've been asked to write on by quite a few people, but here's the thing: in order to understand that war, you have to understand the Caucasian Region, which is a thread in its own right. And that would take forever to make. The Caucasus has numerous ethnicities, each of whom ruled the region at some point in time, and are extremely proud about it. So I'd have to go into that for context and background. Then I'd have to go into how Imperial Russia vastly improved the region, until it was hit by England in the Great Game. After that, I'd have to talk about the negative effects of Russification. Then the Civil War and Stalin, and that would only bring me up to the 1920's. Then I'd do the regional unity during the Great Patriotic War, followed by Stalin messing up the region, the Khrushevka Reforms, the fall of the USSR, compare that to 1921, and that would bring me to the 1990s. After that - fuck, I could probably write a book

I see.

Anyhow, what're the chances of ANEL, Potami and Dimar making it into the government to ally with SYRIZA?

ANEL will most likely enter the parliament and will most certainly ally with Syriza since they have some short of informal pact(ANEL will get the defense and education ministries).
Potami as I said will enter parliament but it is rather unpredictable, much like Beppe Grillo's FSM.
Dimar is a lost case unless they re-join Syriza after their rogue opportunist trip, something that will cost them a lot of political prestige as a group. They'll propably enter the parliament but with much difficulty.
There is also the black hosre of Kodiso, Papandreou's "socialist" "movement". Though they would do more harm than good even if they allied with Syriza in parliament.

[Southern Hampshire]

New Democracy seems like the only reasonable alternative in that country of weird parties.

I won't blame SYRIZA or Golden Dawn for their extremism though. Greece will never manage to pay back that debt.

Would personally choose Golden Dawn out of the two though.