Thread: "Cold" War: Who was the winner?

Originally Posted by Inna

You are partially right. It was communism collapse. But I think this war seems to be endless (Dallas plan implementation, for examp., or Iraq war – SHOW and so on). As for arms race, Russia and most of former-soviet countries have no capacity for military-industrial complex development. Most of them must just listen and carry out what US and EU say to do. They have no choice. The most interesting they do nothing to change the situation. Russia keeps silence. Mr Putin says : Nothing wrong, everything is ok, Russia & US = friendship forever. Tell me what does it mean? Or maybe Russia in hibernation? Is it so funny politic game?
Belarus Republic looks like a crazy, strongly blind drunk bear. Sometimes when I see Mr Lukashenko it seems to me there is a crazy house.
As for “fat cats”, they all will play by humans lifes because of money. From time to time I ask myself: “If it is war, I have much money, being fat cat, will I plan the same games as the play. It is awful but I say “yes”.
As for now, I could say that US is the winner and the whole world is the loser.

Война не проиграна. Война продолжается!
Иначе бы вокруг России не выстраивалась цепь военных баз, до сих пор.
И нового мирового порядка не будет.
Посмотрим на Францию с Германией. Брыкаются, пинаются с США, отступают и чуть момент улучшился снова начинают. Это все таки показатель. Не то что раньше - сидели и дадакали действиям США.
Насчет Путина. Слова они все стерпят. По действиям судите, по действиям. А действия то они уж не такие дружелюбные.

Originally Posted by mike

Were those movies popular in Russia at the time? I mean, I know they must've had them because Visotskiy wrote a song about James Bond, but were they liked?

Not so much popular. That's just the point of VV's song about Sean Connery visiting Moscow (if it's the one you mention): he expected the crowds of fans, and was quite shocked discovering he was almost unknown in USSR. (True story, AFAIK).

How about the idea of the European Union winning the Cold War? After the collapse of the USSR, there was very little challenge to the US's world-wide "influence" until the European Union started trying to assert it's muscle in world affairs. They're growing so fast now, that they have as much a chance as anyone to prosper and, if they can ever agree on something, act as a world super-power.

I don't see that happening any time soon and, if it weren't for the need to balance the US out a bit, I can't say I mind... We don't need soldiers dying in far away deserts or jungles. I'm pretty happy as it is, thank you very much. So we don't have the power and/or will to support dubious rebel groups, kick out evil dictators that don't see it our way and tell other nations they should comply with our wishes or get trashed. I can live with that.

How about as an economic power, though? If someone could overtake the US economically, these silly wars would be much harder for her to afford, and they would eventually have to either get international support (which they likely wouldn't) or stop. Seems that the EU could have the ability to provide as much economic threat to the US as the USSR posed a military threat. I'm not much of a politician, though, so I could be way off an never know it if nobody told me.

Economically the EU already forms a strong bloc against the US. There have been numerous trade wars between the two sides already. But these wars never get out of hand for the same reason as the Cold War never went out of hand: such a "total war" would destroy us all! With globalism, our economies are so strongly connected that any actions against the other side would hurt the one imposing the sanctions almost just as hard.

And we are so interdependent of each other, that we would never start a war. And of course our systems of government are the same.

You're slowly veering away from the topic, guys. Just a reminder.

Well, this might not steer us back, but while we're on the subject.... Is Russia likely to ever join the EU, and if it does, how fast will it become a dominating power in it?

Not in the near future. I think Russia will form her own sphere of economic cooperation in which most of the former Soviet republics will be integrated. If Russia were to join the EU one day, I'd say she'd be one of the leading nations.

Russia'll only be one of the leading nations because of their nuclear weapons... For example the purchasing power parity of Russia is only 3 times as many as Holland's, while Russia has some 10 times as many inhabitants. And, even more alarming, Holland's budget is twice as large as Russia's. (source: www.cia.gov)

Well, I assume Russia will evolve and the Russian economy will grow. Russia has more potential for growth than the West. They won't catch up in the next 25 years or so, but given their population, they, economically speaking, will sure be a force to be reckoned with in the near future.

One other point. The US had the official policy during the Cold War of Mutually Assured Destruction ("M.A.D." -- no joke, I once met the man who created the doctrine, and talked with him about it at length). "If both sides can completely destroy the other, peace will continue." This is part of that dark cloud that hung over all of us during the "Cold War."

The race to maintain balance in nukes nearly bankrupted the USSR; hence the decline of infrastructure which continues today.

Today both sides are destroying nukes, and in light of Iraq, the US is also busy destroying its chemical weapons.

The world is more unstable, but the total destruction of the planet through MAD is a thing of the past. Слава Богу.

Originally Posted by DrRick

The race to maintain balance in nukes nearly bankrupted the USSR; hence the decline of infrastructure which continues today.

That is not quite correct. It was the conventional arms race that destroyed the USSR. The tanks, the aircraft, the spacecraft, the ships and submarines. Under the same MAD doctrine none of that was necessary -- well, except the strike submarines perhaps -- but the USSR went on. That and the "industrial" race, remember that the USSR had or wanted to produce everything.

The U.S.S.R. is a prime example of why Communism doesn't work. It denies the people the very thing that makes industry and economy flourish--creativity. People living under Communism are not allowed to be creative. Their ideas are stifled. All they do is what they are told to do, so they become robots, slaves of the state. There is no democracy, there is no freedom, no creativity. So while in the short term Communist societies may flourish, in the long term there is no improvement in the economy. In a Democracy the people are always coming out with new ideas and new products that are embraced by the public and the government. People don't like being trapped in a shell, only doing what they are told to do for fear of the consequences if they don't. That is why a Democracy can outdo a Communist society.

Originally Posted by Dynamo

The U.S.S.R. is a prime example of why Communism doesn't work.

Yeah, sure and the second example is P.R.C. where communism doesn't work too. The GDP is growing there for 8% per year.

People living under Communism are not allowed to be creative. Their ideas are stifled.

But why the best movies and books were created in the USSR, and there is nothing to create right now instead of advertising, soap operas and advertising again?

All they do is what they are told to do, so they become robots, slaves of the state. There is no democracy, there is no freedom, no creativity. So while in the short term Communist societies may flourish, in the long term there is no improvement in the economy.

This is a demagogy. Just look at P.R.C.

... People don't like being trapped in a shell, only doing what they are told to do for fear of the consequences if they don't. That is why a Democracy can outdo a Communist society.

So what about PRC? 1 200 000 000 population, GDP - $5.989 trillion, GDP growth rate 8%, 51% of GDP is industry and construction. USA - GDP $10.45 trillion, GDP growth rate is 2.4% and 80% of GDP is services. In 5-10 years the biggest economy in the world will be China.

Just look at P.R.C.

http://www.hrw.org/asia/china.php


Just look at the People's Republic of China, JJ.

Originally Posted by joysof

http://www.hrw.org/asia/china.php
Just look at the People's Republic of China, JJ.

So what? What are you wating from human's right watch? Don't you think that "democratic" organization tells the truth to you about opposite social system? I lived in the USSR and I know more about human's rights in Communism than you and I bet the Chinees reality is not much worse. Now I live in "democracy" and I see that a lot of things changed for the worse. The HRW are liars.

Originally Posted by Dynamo

The U.S.S.R. is a prime example of why Communism doesn't work. It denies the people the very thing that makes industry and economy flourish--creativity. People living under Communism are not allowed to be creative.

What you are saying is but idiocy. How was creativity disallowed in the USSR?

Their ideas are stifled. All they do is what they are told to do, so they become robots, slaves of the state.

Right. So the party says, for example, "this man must orbit the Earth", and the designers, having no creativity whatsoever, just do it somehow, correct? They don't invent anything, they just do as they are told.

Originally Posted by bad manners

How was creativity disallowed in the USSR?

It's not that it is disallowed, it is stiffled.

If everyone recieves equal share of the nation's resources, there is no motivation to try hard. You work you ass off everyday only to earn the same as lazy slacker next to you? Doesn't take long to kill the morale of the hard worker.

The fantasy of Communism is that people will work hard for the good of the community but that just doesn't happen.

And, BTW, Democracy is not the opposite of Communism. Laise-faire Capitalim is.

Tim.