Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a
transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the
current reference desk pages.
January 23 Information
Countries that were intended as temporary creations and as stepping stones to annexation by some other, larger country?
Which countries were intended as temporary creations and as stepping stones to annexation by some other, larger country? So far, I can think of the
Republic of Texas, the
Bear Flag Republic, and the
Republic of Hawaii in regards to wanting annexation by the
United States (ultimately fulfilled) and the
Donetsk People's Republic and
Luhansk People's Republic in regards to wanting annexation by
Russia (ultimately unfulfilled, at least as of right now). Of course, there was also the
Tuvan People's Republic between 1921 and 1944, but I am unsure if the goal of this republic was actually outright annexation to Russia from the very beginning of this republic's existence like it was (in regards to annexation by Russia and by the United States) for my other examples above here.
Futurist110 (
talk) 07:10, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The Roman Empire set up puppet states (client kingdoms) in Egypt, Judea and
Asia Minor. Sleigh (
talk) 09:14, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The
Cretan State would be an example, as would be the current
Republic of Cyprus (where a prospect of eventual unification with Greece was considered a political goal by many when it was founded).
Kosovo might count as another example (eventual unification with a "Greater Albania" being a goal of some of the Albanian insurgents during the war).
Fut.Perf.su 09:45, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Transnistria was originally set up to be annexed by Russia, but it was just too far apart geographically for that to work, so it lives on in legal limbo to this day.
Xuxl (
talk) 14:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Not sure that it's more isolated than
Kaliningrad oblast. Some observers have claimed that the Post-Soviet Russian government likes having legally-dubious and not-finally-settled situations in the "near abroad", such as Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh, etc.
AnonMoos (
talk) 15:32, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Kaliningrad can be accessed from Russia by sea, though. In contrast, Russia would have to go through another country's territory to access Transnistria since Transnistria can't actually be accessed by sea due to it having no coastline at all. Now, if Russia were to conquer
Odessa (say, with Russian paratroopers, as the Germans did with German paratroopers with
their own invasion of Crete back in 1941) and to annex it to Transnistria, then it would become a different story in regards to this.
Futurist110 (
talk) 19:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
To get to Transnistria, they would not have to cross the land territory of any other state, but rather sail up the international Dniester river, right?
AnonMoos (
talk) 21:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
And blockading this river would be an act of war?
Futurist110 (
talk) 05:12, 24 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Why exactly wouldn't it count for this?
Futurist110 (
talk) 04:01, 24 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Maybe because it was just a stepping stone to Crimea's expected absorption into Russia's sphere. <-
Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots-> 22:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Our
Dniester article does not mention it being an
open river. Does some law apply by default? --
Error (
talk) 03:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Sorry that I expressed myself poorly; what I basically meant was that the part of the river which is within the Ukraine in the south (and which is actually a river) is rather short, and if Transnistria were an independent state (or annexed to Russia), much of the rest of the river would lie along international boundaries. Since an independent/annexed Transnistria would be separated from the sea by a short stretch of wide river, it's more like those countries that are cut off from international waters (which includes some countries with a seacoast, like Slovenia), rather than a truly landlocked country such as the Central African Republic or whatever...
AnonMoos (
talk) 14:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Doesn't the Baltic freeze in winter? Or maybe Kaliningrad and the Black Sea are the only Russian ice-free ports? --
Error (
talk) 03:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Depending on your
historiography, many of the
Republics of the Soviet Union started as initially "independent" states that later joined in free association with Russia to form the
Soviet Union; another perspective is that these were set up by Russia as a means to expand its influence over its satellite states and incorporate them into the Soviet Union, which was dominated by Russia from the start due to its massively larger population and geography within the Union. The
legal fiction of being independent republics was even maintained in the United Nations, as the
Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the
Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic were given full membership as sovereign states, even though they had no functional independence from the USSR. In the case of the
Baltic states, the Soviet Union didn't even pretend they joined the union of their own free will; they were forcibly annexed and the Soviet Union installed a Soviet-style government in each of them; its why they were the first to go in the dissolution of the Soviet Union. --
Jayron32 12:13, 25 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Summary judgment and letters of credit
I was given the following statement to elaborate on: "The
summary judgment procedure is said to be an advantage of
Letters of Credit". It refers to
Part 24 of the
UK Rules of Civil Procedure, thus we are talking about English Law. No more information is provided. After some research, I have not found one source that mentions this "advantage" (also, advantage compared to what?). Case law suggests that enforcement of letters of credit is indeed often sought through summary judgments, but I am unable to find a connection between the two. Does anyone have an idea what this statement is referring to? Regards,
XanonymusX (
talk) 17:35, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
XanonymusX: What do you mean it was given to you? Is this a homework assignment?
RudolfRed (
talk) 18:07, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
It is part of a course on Trade Finance, yes. –
XanonymusX (
talk) 18:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
I assume it means that summary judgment is not available in all cases. The thing with summary judgment, at least in U.S. law, is that it avoids the time and expense of going to trial, having witnesses testify, etc. I would suspect that with a letter of credit, the letter itself is sufficient evidence for judgment, and thus the perfect case for summary judgment.
69.174.144.79 (
talk) 18:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
And, guessing, the supposed advantage (viz., less delay in receiving payment) may be in comparison to other payment mechanisms in case the payment to the beneficiary is unduly withheld, stemming from a diminished prospect of the defaulting payer to successfully defend the claim and thus an increased chance of claimant (the beneficiary) being awarded a summary judgment. --
Lambiam 10:11, 24 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Near the end of World War II, what did the Germans & Japanese do with their prisoners-of-war? Did they execute them, moved them to other POW camps or let them live and stay?
86.133.195.11 (
talk) 20:52, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The Japanese treated prisoners throughout the war rather poorly; I'm not sure that much changed towards the end. It was among a number of steps by the Japanese authorities -- such as not even bothering to tell their soldiers about the Geneva Conventions, attacking Pearl Harbor without a declaration of war, refusing to surrender during or after a battle even when such refusal had little real military value, sometimes deliberately killing civilians (or encouraging civilians to commit suicide) while refusing to surrender (as at Okinawa), "kamikaze" suicide attacks, etc -- which persuaded most in the U.S. that they had no morality or ethics, and set no value on human lives (their own or others')...
AnonMoos (
talk) 21:41, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
P.S. Stalin's Soviet Union was somewhat unique in mistreating its own soldiers who had been prisoners of war in other countries...
AnonMoos (
talk) 21:44, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
See
Sandakan Death Marches for an example of what Japan did. Death orders were also ordered for civilian internees, for example at
Batu Lintang camp, but the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had a salutary effect and they were not in the end carried out. Of course many internees had already been starved or beaten to death, died from medical neglect, or been "executed" without any legal basis.
DuncanHill (
talk) 21:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
In Europe, many prisoners from the Western Allies were held in camps in the eastern part of the Reich and were moved on foot in early 1945 to avoid the advancing Soviet forces, in appalling winter conditions; see our article,
The March (1945) - "almost 3,500 US and Commonwealth POWs died as a result of the marches".
Alansplodge (
talk) 23:45, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a
transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the
current reference desk pages.
January 23 Information
Countries that were intended as temporary creations and as stepping stones to annexation by some other, larger country?
Which countries were intended as temporary creations and as stepping stones to annexation by some other, larger country? So far, I can think of the
Republic of Texas, the
Bear Flag Republic, and the
Republic of Hawaii in regards to wanting annexation by the
United States (ultimately fulfilled) and the
Donetsk People's Republic and
Luhansk People's Republic in regards to wanting annexation by
Russia (ultimately unfulfilled, at least as of right now). Of course, there was also the
Tuvan People's Republic between 1921 and 1944, but I am unsure if the goal of this republic was actually outright annexation to Russia from the very beginning of this republic's existence like it was (in regards to annexation by Russia and by the United States) for my other examples above here.
Futurist110 (
talk) 07:10, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The Roman Empire set up puppet states (client kingdoms) in Egypt, Judea and
Asia Minor. Sleigh (
talk) 09:14, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The
Cretan State would be an example, as would be the current
Republic of Cyprus (where a prospect of eventual unification with Greece was considered a political goal by many when it was founded).
Kosovo might count as another example (eventual unification with a "Greater Albania" being a goal of some of the Albanian insurgents during the war).
Fut.Perf.su 09:45, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Transnistria was originally set up to be annexed by Russia, but it was just too far apart geographically for that to work, so it lives on in legal limbo to this day.
Xuxl (
talk) 14:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Not sure that it's more isolated than
Kaliningrad oblast. Some observers have claimed that the Post-Soviet Russian government likes having legally-dubious and not-finally-settled situations in the "near abroad", such as Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh, etc.
AnonMoos (
talk) 15:32, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Kaliningrad can be accessed from Russia by sea, though. In contrast, Russia would have to go through another country's territory to access Transnistria since Transnistria can't actually be accessed by sea due to it having no coastline at all. Now, if Russia were to conquer
Odessa (say, with Russian paratroopers, as the Germans did with German paratroopers with
their own invasion of Crete back in 1941) and to annex it to Transnistria, then it would become a different story in regards to this.
Futurist110 (
talk) 19:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
To get to Transnistria, they would not have to cross the land territory of any other state, but rather sail up the international Dniester river, right?
AnonMoos (
talk) 21:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
And blockading this river would be an act of war?
Futurist110 (
talk) 05:12, 24 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Why exactly wouldn't it count for this?
Futurist110 (
talk) 04:01, 24 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Maybe because it was just a stepping stone to Crimea's expected absorption into Russia's sphere. <-
Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots-> 22:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Our
Dniester article does not mention it being an
open river. Does some law apply by default? --
Error (
talk) 03:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Sorry that I expressed myself poorly; what I basically meant was that the part of the river which is within the Ukraine in the south (and which is actually a river) is rather short, and if Transnistria were an independent state (or annexed to Russia), much of the rest of the river would lie along international boundaries. Since an independent/annexed Transnistria would be separated from the sea by a short stretch of wide river, it's more like those countries that are cut off from international waters (which includes some countries with a seacoast, like Slovenia), rather than a truly landlocked country such as the Central African Republic or whatever...
AnonMoos (
talk) 14:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Doesn't the Baltic freeze in winter? Or maybe Kaliningrad and the Black Sea are the only Russian ice-free ports? --
Error (
talk) 03:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Depending on your
historiography, many of the
Republics of the Soviet Union started as initially "independent" states that later joined in free association with Russia to form the
Soviet Union; another perspective is that these were set up by Russia as a means to expand its influence over its satellite states and incorporate them into the Soviet Union, which was dominated by Russia from the start due to its massively larger population and geography within the Union. The
legal fiction of being independent republics was even maintained in the United Nations, as the
Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the
Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic were given full membership as sovereign states, even though they had no functional independence from the USSR. In the case of the
Baltic states, the Soviet Union didn't even pretend they joined the union of their own free will; they were forcibly annexed and the Soviet Union installed a Soviet-style government in each of them; its why they were the first to go in the dissolution of the Soviet Union. --
Jayron32 12:13, 25 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Summary judgment and letters of credit
I was given the following statement to elaborate on: "The
summary judgment procedure is said to be an advantage of
Letters of Credit". It refers to
Part 24 of the
UK Rules of Civil Procedure, thus we are talking about English Law. No more information is provided. After some research, I have not found one source that mentions this "advantage" (also, advantage compared to what?). Case law suggests that enforcement of letters of credit is indeed often sought through summary judgments, but I am unable to find a connection between the two. Does anyone have an idea what this statement is referring to? Regards,
XanonymusX (
talk) 17:35, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
XanonymusX: What do you mean it was given to you? Is this a homework assignment?
RudolfRed (
talk) 18:07, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
It is part of a course on Trade Finance, yes. –
XanonymusX (
talk) 18:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
I assume it means that summary judgment is not available in all cases. The thing with summary judgment, at least in U.S. law, is that it avoids the time and expense of going to trial, having witnesses testify, etc. I would suspect that with a letter of credit, the letter itself is sufficient evidence for judgment, and thus the perfect case for summary judgment.
69.174.144.79 (
talk) 18:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
And, guessing, the supposed advantage (viz., less delay in receiving payment) may be in comparison to other payment mechanisms in case the payment to the beneficiary is unduly withheld, stemming from a diminished prospect of the defaulting payer to successfully defend the claim and thus an increased chance of claimant (the beneficiary) being awarded a summary judgment. --
Lambiam 10:11, 24 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Near the end of World War II, what did the Germans & Japanese do with their prisoners-of-war? Did they execute them, moved them to other POW camps or let them live and stay?
86.133.195.11 (
talk) 20:52, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The Japanese treated prisoners throughout the war rather poorly; I'm not sure that much changed towards the end. It was among a number of steps by the Japanese authorities -- such as not even bothering to tell their soldiers about the Geneva Conventions, attacking Pearl Harbor without a declaration of war, refusing to surrender during or after a battle even when such refusal had little real military value, sometimes deliberately killing civilians (or encouraging civilians to commit suicide) while refusing to surrender (as at Okinawa), "kamikaze" suicide attacks, etc -- which persuaded most in the U.S. that they had no morality or ethics, and set no value on human lives (their own or others')...
AnonMoos (
talk) 21:41, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
P.S. Stalin's Soviet Union was somewhat unique in mistreating its own soldiers who had been prisoners of war in other countries...
AnonMoos (
talk) 21:44, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
See
Sandakan Death Marches for an example of what Japan did. Death orders were also ordered for civilian internees, for example at
Batu Lintang camp, but the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had a salutary effect and they were not in the end carried out. Of course many internees had already been starved or beaten to death, died from medical neglect, or been "executed" without any legal basis.
DuncanHill (
talk) 21:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply
In Europe, many prisoners from the Western Allies were held in camps in the eastern part of the Reich and were moved on foot in early 1945 to avoid the advancing Soviet forces, in appalling winter conditions; see our article,
The March (1945) - "almost 3,500 US and Commonwealth POWs died as a result of the marches".
Alansplodge (
talk) 23:45, 23 January 2021 (UTC)reply