sad thoughts on poly posters

[MrFun]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Would that you had faced the same choices. I'd bet you'd have made the same or similar decisions.

It's all too easy sitting this side of WW2 and the fall of the Berlin Wall to second guess the people who lived it and held the fate of the world in their hands, on all sides.

The trick is to understand what they did and most importantly, why they did it. That is history.

The reason why the United States betrayed her principles during the Cold War, were for economic, military strategic, and ideological reasons.

That much I do understand.

[notyoueither]

Never because some president from Truman through Kennedy and up to Reagan thought they were doing the right thing?

[GeneralTacticus]

SD, Could you amplify your thoughts here. By Dec. 7, 1941, the US had all but declared war on Germany and Japan through Lend Lease and the Embargo respectively. We were threatening the Axis, not the other way around.

The embargo on Japan was a response to their entirely unjustified war of aggression in China, while Lend-Lease was to help defend Britain against equally unjustified German aggression.

and to some extent, China's democracy.

What democracy??? China before and throughout the war was divided between the Kuomintang, who ran a repressive dictatorship, and the Communists, who weren't particularly democratic either.

Since WWII, I think the US has continued its aggressived defense of democracy and human rights. This is how we think of ourselves, btw. It is part of our national culture.

How exactly is the support of brutal dictators throughout the Third World an 'aggressive defence of democracy and human rights'?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
How exactly is the support of brutal dictators throughout the Third World an 'aggressive defence of democracy and human rights'?

The stuggle was between Western democracies and the Stalinist Eastern Bloc.

The struggle played out in many other countries through many other puppets.

The fact is today Eastern Europe is free to go as they choose. India is a democracy, Russia is just about, and China won't last much longer. And on the list could go ...

Do you think the Cold War was without price? Or point?

[KrazyHorse]

India was always a democracy (or at least mostly so) from 1950 onwards.

[KrazyHorse]

By the way, NYE: bull****.

Let's see you justify American intervention in SA in countries which had democratically elected governments of similear disposition to Western European governments...

[GeneralTacticus]

The stuggle was between Western democracies and the Stalinist Eastern Bloc.

The Stalinism of the Eastern bloc ended with Kruschev.

The struggle played out in many other countries through many other puppets.

And this means what?

The fact is today Eastern Europe is free to go as they choose. India is a democracy, Russia is just about, and China won't last much longer. And on the list could go ...

Yet does this change the tyranny that Latin America had to go through? The devastation of Nicaragua and Vietnam? The million plus 'communists' of Indonesia massacred by Suharto? The fact that one third of East Timor's population died under Indonesian occupation? The death toll from the civil war in Angola? There are many other examples of US-sponsored atrocities as well. How many examples can you produce of nations where American action brought democracy instead of destroying it? Korea is the only one I can think of.

Do you think the Cold War was without price? Or point?

No. But I think that the price for those that were caught in it was unnecessarily high.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Frogger
India was always a democracy (or at least mostly so) from 1950 onwards.

Yes, and the Soviets and Chinese never, ever had any designs on the region, right?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Frogger
By the way, NYE: bull****.

Let's see you justify American intervention in SA in countries which had democratically elected governments of similear disposition to Western European governments...

Don't have to justify it. It happened. It was a part of the Cold War. Do you think the KGB was completely inactive in the Americas south of Mexico? Do you think the Americans thought so?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Yes, and the Soviets and Chinese never, ever had any designs on the region, right?

How were the Indians, founders of the Non-Aligned Nations movement, fighters of a war or two against China, fighters of a war or two against Pakistan (a US ally) protected by the US propping up dictatorships in countries which either shared no border with India or which were actively hostile to it?

[GeneralTacticus]

Don't have to justify it. It happened. It was a part of the Cold War. Do you think the KGB was completely inactive in the Americas south of Mexico? Do you think the Americans thought so?

Do you think that justifies subjecting an entire continent to virtual neo-colonialism? The only thing that was better abut the Latin american dictatorships against the Eastern European communist ones was that they didn't last as long.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Don't have to justify it. It happened. It was a part of the Cold War. Do you think the KGB was completely inactive in the Americas south of Mexico? Do you think the Americans thought so?

That's not enough for me. Otherwise we're just going to have to ignore Soviet actions in Czechoslovakia, Hungary, etc. as "just having happened". At what point do you actually make value judgment between the two? Or is it just that you were born on this side of the globe, and that's all the justification you need?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Yet does this change the tyranny that Latin America had to go through? The devastation of Nicaragua and Vietnam? The million plus 'communists' of Indonesia massacred by Suharto? The fact that one third of East Timor's population died under Indonesian occupation? The death toll from the civil war in Angola? There are many other examples of US-sponsored atrocities as well. How many examples can you produce of nations where American action brought democracy instead of destroying it? Korea is the only one I can think of.

No. But I think that the price for those that were caught in it was unnecessarily high.

Stalinism? Ended with Kruschev? I'm sure the various victims of the KGB would laugh at that one. I am being kind in my use of terms. I personally feel that Marx would turn in his grave if he knew about the Soviets right down to near the end. I do him and others the courtesy of not referring to them as 'Communists' for these sorts of discussions.

Democracies? Germany, Japan... pretty significant, no? How about in the long run? Poland, Hungary, the Czechs and the Slovaks too, etc.

As for the Americas, one word. Cuba. Yup, les Amis are nuts on the subject, but it isn't as if they had nothing to fret about during the Cold War. And if you think the Sandinistas materialized themselves out of nothing with no outside support, I have a bridge for sale just for you.

Were there a whole boat load of bad things happening in many countries sponsored by both sides? You bet. Boy scouts don't win wars.

[KrazyHorse]

I don't recall a war being fought between the two; I recall a bunch of people on both sides getting all worked up and using it as an excuse to slaughter third-party innocents.

[GeneralTacticus]

Stalinism? Ended with Kruschev? I'm sure the various victims of the KGB would laugh at that one. I am being kind in my use of terms. I personally feel that Marx would turn in his grave if he knew about the Soviets right down to near the end. I do him and others the courtesy of not referring to them as 'Communists' for these sorts of discussions.

I said STALINISM ended with Kruschev, not dictatorship. I'm not arguing that the Soviets were nice, but the USSR was far bette after Stalin than before.

Democracies? Germany, Japan... pretty significant, no? How about in the long run? Poland, Hungary, the Czechs and the Slovaks too, etc.

Democracy in Germany and Japan was before the Cold War really began. And how exactly did US action bring about democracy in Eastern Europe?

As for the Americas, one word. Cuba. Yup, les Amis are nuts on the subject, but it isn't as if they had nothing to fret about during the Cold War. And if you think the Sandinistas materialized themselves out of nothing with no outside support, I have a bridge for sale just for you.

Does the appearance of a political group which you don't like justify destroying an entire national economy? The Contras were set up for the specific purpose of attacking civilian targets such as health clinics and agricultural collectives.

Were there a whole boat load of bad things happening in many countries sponsored by both sides? You bet. Boy scouts don't win wars.

How exactly was the US any better than the USSR during the Cold War? The dictatorships they set up weren't intended to give way to democracy whenpossible, they were there to prevent democracy.