Humanities desk
< August 7	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 9 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

August 8

Us Presidential yachts

Hello, I've juste written on the French Wikipedia an article about the US Presidential yachts (fr:Yachts des présidents des États-Unis). I do not find similar article on the English Wikipédia but few articles on differents presidential yachts and I'm looking for more informations :
I found four offical US presidential yachts :

USS Mayflower (PY-1), from 1905 to 1929 with a brief hiatus in 1906
USS Sequoia (AG-23), from 1934 to 1936, then for Secretary of the Navy from 1936 to 1969, then for President and others US government official use from 1969 to 1977 and sold by Jimmy Carter
USS Potomac (AG-25), from 1936 to 1945
Williamsburg (yacht) from 1945 to 1953

Questions :
1. No others official US presidential yacht after 1953.
1.1 The photos with JFK on a yacht in the early 1960s have been shoot on a private yacht ? USS Sequoia (but seems to small) ?
1.2 No others president use a personal yacht wich could be consider (like for the Western White House) as a nearly presidential yacht ?
2. A 1945 Time article speaks about Grover Cleveland cruising aboard the gunboat Dolphin and William McKinley on the Sylph. The first one seems to be a US Navy boat (or US Coast Guard boat) and the second one ? Could the be consider as official presidential boats ?
3. Photos on navsource.org suggests that the Mayflower ended in the Israeli navy as INS Maoz (K 24). The USS Mayflower (PY-1) article on the english Wikipedia give the link to this website but not this information.
Thanks for the help. TCY (talk) 08:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why does Russia support Ossetian Independence?

The recent news of Russian tanks entering South Ossetia has reminded me of something I've been curious about over this issue; which is, why does Russia support the independence of this region, when the other half of Ossetia is in Russian territory? Wouldn't it be kinda self defeating? The way I see it there are two possibilities: The first is that the independence movement in North Ossetia is much smaller and/or not affiliated with the South Ossetian movement. Therefore Russia don't see it as a risk. The other is that Russia are just doing anything they can to undermine Georgia, confident they can put down sedition on their side of the border. Presumably a combination of these factors? --86.135.87.181 (talk) 15:09, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Ossetia and South Ossetia. The area was formerly controlled by Georgia, and the international community still regards it as such. However, if they achieve independence, this will likely bring them back into the Russian sphere of influence, either through unification with North Ossetia or even if it remains an independent nation. Russia used a similar strategy when they supported the independence of Transnistria from Moldova. StuRat (talk) 15:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also important is the intention of Georgia (country) to enter NATO. Russia doesn't seem to want NATO bases in one of its neighbours. Therefore Georgia and its government must be weakened (and preferably its government replaced by a more cooperative one). The Kremlin seems to believe that all this mess will teach Russia's neighbours a valuable lesson: Don't oppose (or mess with) the bear. They might even be right. However the whole 'frightening example' just might back-fire and Russia's neighbours might scramble all the harder for NATO membership exactly because they are becoming more and more frightened. Flamarande (talk) 19:28, 8 August 2008 (UTC) Notice that this is just my personal opinion.[reply]

I'm still confused. By unification with North Ossetia, are you referring to North Ossetia breaking away from Russia, or South Ossetia becoming a part of Russia? In the first case, why would Russia want some of it's territory declaring independence? and in the second, why would South Ossetia, having gained independence from one nation (Georgia), be so eager to join another? --86.135.87.181 (talk) 22:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assure the questioner that no separatist movements have been registered in North Ossetia over the last century or so. Russian-Ossetian ties go as far back in history as the marriage of Maria Shvarnovna and Vsevolod the Big Nest. The Russian national hero Alexander Nevsky had Ossetian blood in his veins. As my pages about Alania and Arkhyz demonstrate, Ossetia has been an Orthodox Christian nation for more than a millennium, while all separatist movements in Russia are based on Muslim radicalism. In the light of their pro-Russian mindset, the Ossetes are normally the ones targeted by the separatists (see Beslan school hostage crisis for more). Thus much history has taught them: they won't survive amid hostile Muslim and Georgian neighbours without Moscow's support. --Ghirla^-трёп- 18:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect to Flamarande, I must disagree with his assessment: the desire to enter NATO came much later into this equation. Mostly it's that Georgia and Russia just don't like each other. Georgia is a breakaway from the USSR, and Russia kind of wanted to retain control over the area, but couldn't. Then part of Georgia itself wanted to breakaway, so naturally Russia supported this. In this area of the world, a country is either pro-Muslim, pro-Russian, or pro-Western. There are few Muslims in Georgia. If Georgia is pro-Western, and South Ossetia is anti-Georgia, then South Ossetia is pro-Russia. And reunification with North Ossetia would mean integration into Russia anyway.

On a separate issue, I'm glad to see that even while two major countries in Asia have admitted to started a war, with over 1000 dead, the main story in the US media is that... John Edwards has a mistress. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:39, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...while the rest of the world is mostly watching the beginning of the Olympic Games. It could of course be a hell of an coincidence, but it probably was planned this way. Flamarande (talk) 10:43, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there not any movement for complete North Ossetian independence from Russia, regardless of how unrealistic it would be? As I said in my original question, is it just a case of Russia being so powerful that they are confident that they can put down any such sedition on their own side of Ossetia? --86.135.87.181 (talk) 22:55, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is a big part of it, and probably the most important part. Georgia is small and Russia is big. There's also the fact that South Ossetia was never real keen on unification with Georgia to begin with (see South Ossetia#Georgian-Ossetian_conflict and related articles under the subheading and History_of_North_Ossetia-Alania#After_the_USSR), while Northern Ossetia had been part of the USSR for several decades anyway. It appears the Ossetians were stuck in a bit of realpolitik and never had much say over thir status. Does anyone here speak Russian, Georgian, or Ossetian and maybe could ask someone on the other language Wikipedias who is more familiar with the situation? Magog the Ogre (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 23:28, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, nyet parlasky Russkye (made it up). Magog, I still believe that the Georgian intention to enter NATO is very important. On several occasions Russian officials (including Putin as he was President) told that they didn't want it, that they wouldn't allow it, and that they would oppose it. Still I agree with your assessment that both countries/governments have lots of (old, and not-so-old) issues against each other. Perhaps NATO was just the last straw? I suppose that we will never know for sure. About the future possibility of a 'unified Ossetian nation' seeking independence from Russia, I guess that the Kremlin is betting in supporting reasonable autonomists, perhaps even giving some reasonable autonomy, and keeping the majority of Ossetians away from the more extreme leaders by a mixture of bribes, threats, and simple fear (from a retaliation by the Russian army and intelligence apparatus). Radical uncompromising leaders struggling for complete independence for Ossetia will suffer inevitable retaliation (in other words: they will be shot/assassinated). Don't forget that Chechnya truly makes a hell of an example of just what not to do (mess with the bear and this is what will happen). Flamarande (talk) 10:34, 9 August 2008 (UTC) Again: this is just my personal opinion.[reply]

I think you mean something like "ya nyet govory po-russkiy". One of the very few sentences I actually know of Russian. And I must have got the inflection and the transcription a bit off. JIP | Talk 08:02, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well it should be "ya ne govoru po-russki", so you're also wrong. Regarding the conflict in question: 1/ Russia wants Georgia to have territorial issues because NATO policy prohibits countries with territorial disputes to enter NATO. On the other hand, Saakashvili after recognition of Kosovo by some countries feels that there is only force solution for the crisis and the longer he wait the greather probability Kosovo precedent to be applied. Regarding Ossetians: they are Orthodox Christian and have no reason to secede from Russia.--Dojarca (talk) 13:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An even closer transliteration would be "ya nye govoryu po-russki". :) Any further takers? -- JackofOz (talk) 15:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not closer.--Dojarca (talk) 04:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the ю in говорю is both pronounced and transliterated as "yu", not "u", hence my preference for "govoryu" over "govoru". -- JackofOz (talk) 21:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm aware Georgia has since 1992 wanted to remove any autonomy for South Ossetia whereas North Ossetia was the first part of Russia to get autonomy. Georgia made an offer of some autonomy this year but it would be more believable if it were re-implemented in Adjara and anyway it has come rather late and would need a bit of confidence building. Sometimes you're better off having independent friends rather than citizens who are enemies. Dmcq (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how you can have an autonomy in a unitary state. It's the problem that Serbia failed to tackle, as does Ukraine with its sham offer of autonomy for Crimea. Georgia's problems started when they decided to have a one-nation state under Zviad Gamsakhurdia. Saakhashvili is repeating his predecessor's mistakes: bombing your own compatriots and reducing Tskhinval to ashes is not a viable solution. --Ghirla^-трёп- 18:12, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, Ajara is a different case from that of South Ossetia: the Adjarians are Muslim Georgians, while the Ossetes belong to a different language family and have a centuries-old tradition of statehood. The founder of Georgia's reigning house, David Soslan, was an Ossete. --Ghirla^-трёп- 18:16, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Bishop Ron Woods Jr.

'Bishop Ron Woods Jr.'Bold text - "The Pentecostal Powerhouse of Iowa " is a 29yrs old Pastor and Teacher of Kingdom Seekers Church Intl , he is also the founder of the Recording Artist Group - Kingdom Praise - a group of talented and Anointed singers from the Des Moines Ia area - he is also a Author , Producer and Presiding Bishop of Kingdom Movement Churches and Board member of Anointed Vessel International Alliance - where The Honorable Bishop Timothy Pleasant is Presider.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Charles Little (talk • contribs) 18:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes? And? Corvus cornix_talk 19:47, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]