Thread: An alternative view of the USA & some other countries

[QUOTE=Hanna;209074]


@fortheether: Ok you have every right to like Ronald Reagan even though few on the forum think very highly of him.... So give a practical example of something that he did that you think was good?



/QUOTE]

He beat Jimmy Carter in the election.

Originally Posted by fortheether

He beat Jimmy Carter in the election.

Admit it, you can't name anything! of course he beat his opponent.... But what did he do during the course of his presidency?
Basil77 and Misha Tal are right - And certainly, most people in Europe (apart from England) think he was terrible, like Bush,

And you Americans are not quite as "free" as you may think you are! You only believe it because you are constantly told it.
Some of the stuff about the greatness of the USA is laughable - nothing unique about it: every country in Europe has it too.

You are free in the USA if you are able to make a decent amount of money so you can afford to pay for everything that is free in Europe...
and assuming your politics are capitalist/christian.... and reasonably PC...

Did you know that Germany is now putting in place many of the EXACT same policies that East Germany had under socialism?
People want that security and level of organisation and they realise now what they were a bit fast to bin a system that had many good (along with the bad...) qualities.

And don't worry about your grand kids Scott... Although they will be broke, maybe China, Russia and some future moslem super power can give them some aid....

That's if the USA doesn't have some "Plan B" for world domination to try when everything else has failed.
For example: "Pay us, or one of those nukes we keep on our base(s) in your country might accidentally go off... "

Sorry if I sound a bit harsh, but I really don't see the USA as the Force of Good that you believe it to be...
I just want to make you see an alternative view.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Admit it, you can't name anything! of course he beat his opponent.... But what did he do during the course of his presidency?
Basil77 and Misha Tal are right - And certainly, most people in Europe (apart from England) think he was terrible, like Bush,

And you Americans are not quite as "free" as you may think you are! You only believe it because you are constantly told it.
Some of the stuff about the greatness of the USA is laughable - nothing unique about it: every country in Europe has it too.

You are free in the USA if you are able to make a decent amount of money so you can afford to pay for everything that is free in Europe...
and assuming your politics are capitalist/christian.... and reasonably PC...

Did you know that Germany is now putting in place many of the EXACT same policies that East Germany had under socialism?
People want that security and level of organisation and they realise now what they were a bit fast to bin a system that had many good (along with the bad...) qualities.

And don't worry about your grand kids Scott... Although they will be broke, maybe China, Russia and some future moslem super power can give them some aid....

That's if the USA doesn't have some "Plan B" for world domination to try when everything else has failed.
For example: "Pay us, or one of those nukes we keep on our base(s) in your country might accidentally go off... "

Sorry if I sound a bit harsh, but I really don't see the USA as the Force of Good that you believe it to be...
I just want to make you see an alternative view.

I'm going to make a new thread called "An alternative view of the USA" to continue this. See you all there...

Originally Posted by fortheether

I'm going to make a new thread called "An alternative view of the USA" to continue this. See you all there...

О, хорошо! Тогда я туда перенесу все подходящие посты.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Admit it, you can't name anything! of course he beat his opponent.... But what did he do during the course of his presidency?
Basil77 and Misha Tal are right - And certainly, most people in Europe (apart from England) think he was terrible, like Bush,

And you Americans are not quite as "free" as you may think you are! You only believe it because you are constantly told it.
Some of the stuff about the greatness of the USA is laughable - nothing unique about it: every country in Europe has it too.

You are free in the USA if you are able to make a decent amount of money so you can afford to pay for everything that is free in Europe...
and assuming your politics are capitalist/christian.... and reasonably PC...

Did you know that Germany is now putting in place many of the EXACT same policies that East Germany had under socialism?
People want that security and level of organisation and they realise now what they were a bit fast to bin a system that had many good (along with the bad...) qualities.

And don't worry about your grand kids Scott... Although they will be broke, maybe China, Russia and some future moslem super power can give them some aid....

That's if the USA doesn't have some "Plan B" for world domination to try when everything else has failed.
For example: "Pay us, or one of those nukes we keep on our base(s) in your country might accidentally go off... "

Sorry if I sound a bit harsh, but I really don't see the USA as the Force of Good that you believe it to be...
I just want to make you see an alternative view.

Hanna - my work has been too busy for me to reply to above - I am looking forward to when I can reply though.

Scott

Sooooo, about SDI, do you really think it was a real threat? Observing US's struggling with ABM now (which is a mush humbler project than SDI was), watching its doubtful effectiveness, I doubt US was capable of SDI in the early 1980s.
Some say that SDI was a bluff in order to hurl USSR into more expenses it could afford, well, if it was it was a very successful one, I'd say the Soviet leaders believed it. Still, I don't see how KGB missed this fact and generally I cannot imagine a bluff of that magnitude and I find it hard to believe.

I think USSR was destroyed from within, not from outside. By its own people, not by some clever US president.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Sooooo, about SDI, do you really think it was a real threat? [...] I doubt US was capable of SDI in the early 1980s.

Honestly, I have no idea. But if you remember the early '80s you'd remember "the Pershing II and the SDI threat" talk was looking for you even if you'd opened your fridge.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Some say that SDI was a bluff in order to hurl USSR into more expenses it could afford, well, if it was it was a very successful one, I'd say the Soviet leaders believed it.

I think so too. At least, that's how it looked from the outside.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Still, I don't see how KGB missed this fact and generally I cannot imagine a bluff of that magnitude and I find it hard to believe.

I think that question was more of the GRU's competence than of the KGB's, but that doesn't make much difference. I mean, the Cold War era intelligence games are a way too complex for a simple-minded crocodile like myself. There's never an end to it. For example, perhaps the SU preparation for the preemptive war was also a disinformation campaign so that the US would spend more money on the SDI (while the Soviet Leaders spent much less on the 'preemptive war preparation' than the US Government on the 'SDI implementation') and the US government realized that fact ('I know that you know that I know') and spent more money in order to really impress the Soviet Leaders more and the SU made the 'preemptive war' looking more realistic, and so the game of who's fooling whom goes on and on.

Originally Posted by Ramil

I think USSR was destroyed from within, not from outside. By its own people, not by some clever US president.

Yes and no. I think the clever US president might have significantly contributed to a situation in which it was beneficial for some people to get more independence (=more local power) and sacrifice the power of the USSR. The 'own people' rode a wave (which was partially created by the US president) to their own benefit.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Honestly, I have no idea. But if you remember the early '80s you'd remember "the Pershing II and the SDI threat" talk was looking for you even if you'd opened your fridge.

Yes, I even remember being very afraid after watching Международная панорама. I understood very little, only that the Americans want us all dead and they're building many bombs. Funny thing, I'd learned about Reagan's Star Wars first and of Lucas's much later.

I think that question was more of the GRU's competence than of the KGB's, but that doesn't make much difference. I mean, the Cold War era intelligence games are a way too complex for a simple-minded crocodile like myself. There's never an end to it. For example, perhaps the SU preparation for the preemptive war was also a disinformation campaign so that the US would spend more money on the SDI (while the Soviet Leaders spent much less on the 'preemptive war preparation' than the US Government on the 'SDI implementation') and the US government realized that fact ('I know that you know that I know') and spent more money in order to really impress the Soviet Leaders more and the SU made the 'preemptive war' looking more realistic, and so the game of who's fooling whom goes on and on.

The spy game was very complicated but it's not like guess what the other side is thinking. You can't really hide the fact that you're building something of such a grand scale as SDI. There could be tons of evidense even to the stupidest spy.

Yes and no. I think the clever US president might have significantly contributed to a situation in which it was beneficial for some people to get more independence (=more local power) and sacrifice the power of the USSR. The 'own people' rode a wave (which was partially created by the US president) to their own benefit.

I really don't think that Brezhnev in 1980 could think coherently about US threat. Because of his illness I don't think he cared much just about anything. He was old and ill and there were many around him who were simply filling their pockets. It's the stagnation, the lack of progress which undermined the socialist ideas. The generation of 1960s grew up in tranquil times when virtually nothing major was happenning. There were no shocks, no goal, no focus. They yawned through this time and got pretty bored with anything 'made in USSR'. The west offered much more attractive things to the young and the most idiotic thing the leaders could do was forbidding all new and fresh ideas (old farts in Politbureau saw to that). They should have given way to the young. I honestly think that if Brezhnev had resigned or died in the mid-seventies things would be much better now. Then again, who knows...

Originally Posted by Ramil

I really don't think that Brezhnev in 1980 could think coherently about US threat. Because of his illness I don't think he cared much just about anything. He was old and ill [...] I honestly think that if Brezhnev had resigned or died in the mid-seventies things would be much better now.

No, no, and no!

First, everything we used to find attractive about the SU (stability, etc.) should be attributed to the stagnation time of Brezhnev. The life before him and after him used to be rather challenging to the ordinary people.

Second, the whole 'preemptive war preparation' started at 1983 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strateg...nse_Initiative) after Brezhnev died (at 1982) and should be attributed to Andropov who was the Secretary General of the CPSU 1982—1984 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Andropov). (Just a reminder that Andropov was previously a Chief of the KGB.) Some people said Andropov died at 1984 (in the Central Governmental Hospital in Moscow from the sudden kidney failure) because he was very successful in the preparation.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

No, no, and no!

First, everything we used to find attractive about the SU (stability, etc.) should be attributed to the stagnation time of Brezhnev. The life before him and after him used to be rather challenging to the ordinary people.

Second, the whole 'preemptive war preparation' started at 1983 (Strategic Defense Initiative - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) after Brezhnev died (at 1982) and should be attributed to Andropov who was the Secretary General of the CPSU 1982—1984 (Yuri Andropov - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). (Just a reminder that Andropov was previously a Chief of the KGB.) Some people said Andropov died at 1984 (in the Central Governmental Hospital in Moscow from the sudden kidney failure) because he was very successful in the preparation.

Perhaps, but nonetheless:

I honestly think that if Brezhnev had resigned or died in the mid-seventies things would be much better now.

Well - one mans propaganda is another mans truth!

Where I lived, we heard both sides of this story, presented in a relatively unbiased way.

But I agree with it-ogo: Media from the socialist countries were always on about "friendship", "solidarity", "brotherhood" and Peace etc, etc..

Whereas the US films were always picturing Russians as bad people.
And then now - Russians always have extreme roles in films: Gangsters of some kind or another, for example.

Originally Posted by fortheether

So the Soviet submarines with nuclear weapons in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans was propaganda? Until a minute ago I thought Nikita Khrushchev said when referring to the USA "We will bury you", but I looked it up:

We will bury you - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

which says he didn't say it. Most Americans think he said it.

Scott

It was said that the subs were sent there to balance the missiles deployed in Turkey )))

Originally Posted by Ramil

It was said that the subs were sent there to balance the missiles deployed in Turkey )))

Just responding to this:

They have military bases and nukes all around the USSR while USSR has no nukes near the USA.

Perhaps, US had similar plans regarding us. ))) Still, according to Soviet propaganda of these days, USSR was a peaceful country Our nuclear forces were merely the means of defense against the frothing lunatics in the White House who dreamed about world's domination.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Perhaps, US had similar plans regarding us. ))) Still, according to Soviet propaganda of these days, USSR was a peaceful country Our nuclear forces were merely the means of defense against the frothing lunatics in the White House who dreamed about world's domination.

Well, they should have had different plans. Honestly, I think the NATO's strategic situation was hopeless by the early '80s. The NATO might have had some local tactical victories, but strategically in Europe it had nothing to prevent a possible SU assault and had to solely rely on its strategic ballistic missiles. So, the only question the SU had - will the Soviet Army be successful enough to deactivate the missiles to prevent the SU from the total destruction? The US made all the attempts to distribute their nuclear weapons and make them hard to reach. However, at some point someone woke up in NATO (perhaps they realized what Andropov's ascending to the Soviet Throne might mean), so they started the SDI out of no other choice available. Which definitely made the situation much worse right away.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Perhaps, US had similar plans regarding us. ))) Still, according to Soviet propaganda of these days, USSR was a peaceful country Our nuclear forces were merely the means of defense against the frothing lunatics in the White House who dreamed about world's domination.

Did the citizens of the USSR hear about the Cuban missile crisis as it was happening?

Originally Posted by fortheether

Did the citizens of the USSR hear about the Cuban missile crisis as it was happening?

Till October, 26th 1962 USSR denied it had deployed missiles on Cuba.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Perhaps, US had similar plans regarding us. ))) Still, according to Soviet propaganda of these days, USSR was a peaceful country Our nuclear forces were merely the means of defense against the frothing lunatics in the White House who dreamed about world's domination.

So you're suggesting that if Gorbachev had waited for another ten years or so USSR would have won the Cold War? Or if Andropov lasted for a few more years.

Originally Posted by Ramil

So you're suggesting that if Gorbachev had waited for another ten years or so USSR would have won the Cold War? Or if Andropov lasted for a few more years.

Quite the opposite. The SU might have started the WWIII within a few years and had the war won or made the entire globe uninhabitable for large mammals like Homo Sapiens. Think about it this way: will the newly appointed fresh US political command launch the few of the remaining strategic missiles if they know the US itself will not be conquered and the Europe has already been conquered?