Dear All,
This topic is to find out international public opinion. Cold war' winner is always a matter of opinion.
I should be obliged to have you detached view.
Printable View
Dear All,
This topic is to find out international public opinion. Cold war' winner is always a matter of opinion.
I should be obliged to have you detached view.
There is no answer to it I guess. But just ad notum the USSR has collapsed. Maybe this is the consequence of that COld War. If we had tried to keep going on arming it would've been even worse because things had been reaching the crisis. It's all over I think.
I don't believe there are any winners re. the cold war :cry: , except of course for the fatcats on both sides, who did well and continue to do well at the expense of others... I suppose US strategists got what they wanted: unlimited and practically unconditional access to the USSR's underbelly of strategically crucial republics. The US en EU arms companies rub their hands in glee, because the new standard in these republics is western gear. It is dead easy for any "western" "humanitarian" organisations to get substantial grants to work in these areas.
Countries and people refusing to play the ball game are demonised consistently by mainstream "pro-market/democratic" mass media. Just look at Belarus.
I think people from many various countries are responsible for this state of affairs. No country is perfect, and most people with wealth like improving on it at the expense of others, whatever country they are in.
Sorry, I seem to have started ranting :lol:
Мы Русские, проиграли эту войну. А победителей в ней и быть не могло.
:cry: Слабый горбачёв начал развал, который до сих пор не остановить.
Мир стал однополярным, США больше никто не сдерживает.
Хотя, убив дракона, победитель сам становится драконом. :evil:
Absolutely agree with garmonistka. I doubt there's a winners in the cold war. There's an obvious loser: the world. In the cold war times it seemed to be more stable and predictable place, than now. Anyway, "Cold war" is always better than hot wars.
To Koba: Не-а, они всегда драконами и были. Но я надеюсь, что на каждого дракона найдется свой Ланселот. :D
Agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koba
Disagree. Где логика? У Вас получается "мы проиграли, но никто не выиграл". Запад победил, зачем розовые очки надевать.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koba
Это не надолго. Свято место пусто не бывает.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koba
Это мы что-ли были драконом? Совсем дисагри.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koba
Представте, что обе стороны применили ядерное оружие. Холодная война переросла в ядерную.
Пусть оправдались все прогнозы,относительно ядерной зимы.
Пусть СССР исчез, вместе с Европой. Над остальным миром наступила ядерная зима.
Кто будет побидителем?
В том то вся и соль, что война была "холодной". В горячей победителей бы не было, но они сумели победить и без обычного или ядерного оружия, потому, что это была совсем другая война - психологическая, информационно-пропагандистская. И они сумели ее выиграть. Противник (то есть мы) был полностью деморализован, верхи разложились и предали, так что бомбы и не понадобились.
You crazy kids probably don't remember, but the older folk probably do: there used to be a term used back in the Cold War called "balance of power." Politicians used to say it was good (publicly, anyway) that there were two superpowers because this "balance of power" was maintained at all times, and in the absence of this there would be a vacuum that would lead to a horrible increase in authority for the other with nothing to check its power. Whether or not this has happened you can be the judge of. This polarization of power was both stable and instable depending on how you look at it. On one hand the threat of nuclear annihilation of the planet by someone who could simply hit a few buttons, or perhaps a malfunctioning computer, loomed over everyone for half a century. On the other hand, people were so afraid of this happening that the conventional wars of the 19th century were all but avoided (and replaced by containment programs and illegal funding of foreign guerrilla/paramilitary groups)--although of course the creation of the UN also played a hefty role in this leaping progress of civilization that should not be understated. So are things better now or then? This and the question of who are the "winners" is hard to say, and subjective to the individual rather than the whole. Perhaps a more relevant question to ask is whether or not the Cold War is really over, or has just changed its name to "The Open-Ended Global War on Terrorism." Cold War spending/organization certainly never ended after 1991, nor did the Cointelpro BS that has simply shifted jurisdiction from the FBI to local JTTF/OHS branches.
I think the James Bond franchise was the real winner in the Cold War.
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?
Do you know the song? ;) All this song is about that nobody knew James Bond :)Quote:
Originally Posted by mike
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.
I know it, but I don't really understand it...Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeus
Подумаешь, агентишко какой-то!Quote:
Originally Posted by mike
У нас в девятом - принц из Сомали!
:) Hey, Pravit, are you still there? ;)
does anybody else mourn the Cold War, in a way?
The fall of the Iron Curtain sounded a death knell not just for totalitarian government in Europe (hurrah), but also for Western (and perhaps Eastern?) ideology. This, I think, was not such a positive side-effect. The mess were in now is a mess made of global plutocracy.
Hey, at least we knew who the enemy was. And so did they.
And it must have given people such a *frisson* to cross from one side to another. I've had many a Guy Burgess fantasy (not *that* sort of Guy Burgess fantasy!).
Just a thought.
As for the winner: sub-saharan Africa. The CCCP did wonders for literacy in those parts. :wink:
агентишко какой-то... :lol2: :lol2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeus
Конечно вам стоит помнить, что вас удостаивает присутствия сам принц из Сомали. Однако, ему пришлось переехать в Киргизстан чтобы жениться на киргизстанской принцессе. Теперь можете его звать Великий принц чудесного рога Африки и бесподобной драгоценности Центральной Азии, который правит с твердой, но благожелательная, рукой, защитник всех Сомалцов и честный союзник Киргизстана, и т.д., и т.д., или по-краткому Принц Сомали и Киргизстана.
Кстати, принцу Сомали интересно знать, что имеешь в виду с "у нас в девятом".... :lol: :lol: :wink:
Что касается заявления господина joysof, принц Сомали благодарен добрым господинам из СССР которые ему учили читать и писать и говорить по-русски, и которые ему подарили чудесное количество оружий того умного конструктора автоматов, господин-товарищ Калашников, и прекрасный подарок весьма удобных реактивных противотанковых гранометов. Большое спасибо из самого принца Сомали.
But, then again, at least they can *spell* Kalashnikov these days.
I'm not sure I hold with this notion that it's the guns which kill people.
It also introduced the radical new concept of not treating women like shit.Quote:
As for the winner: sub-saharan Africa. The CCCP did wonders for literacy in those parts.
Good. You two can battle it out in private messages all the live long day. Anything unrelated to Russian politics will be deleted.Quote:
I'm not sure I hold with this notion that it's the guns which kill people.
Это не я. Это из той самой песни Выс.цкого. Имеется в виду, в девятом номере гостиницы. Спрашивай, если что в словах не понятно. В другом топике. Песня несложная и хорошая :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Pravit
Маленькие исправления (не все). Думаю, это в любом топике можно :)
>защитник всех Сомалцов
Сомалийцев
>господинам из СССР которые ему учили читать
господам из СССР, которые [на]учили его читать
>подарили чудесное количество оружий
...оружия. Оружие - слово только единственного числа. Примерно как aircraft.
>того умного конструктора автоматов, господин-товарищ Калашников
В этом случае надо склонять (родительный падеж) ВСЕ слова:
того... конструктора автоматов, господина-товарища Калашникова.
Кстати, я с Калашниковым лично встречался :P Он в Ижевске живет. Это Удмуртия, предуралье, 1000 км на восток от Москвы.
>Большое спасибо из самого принца Сомали.
...от самого...
Война не проиграна. Война продолжается!Quote:
Originally Posted by Inna
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.
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).Quote:
Originally Posted by mike
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by DrRick
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.
Yeah, sure and the second example is P.R.C. where communism doesn't work too. :lol: The GDP is growing there for 8% per year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dynamo
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?Quote:
People living under Communism are not allowed to be creative. Their ideas are stifled.
This is a demagogy. Just look at P.R.C.Quote:
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.
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.Quote:
... 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.
http://www.hrw.org/asia/china.phpQuote:
Just look at P.R.C.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by joysof
What you are saying is but idiocy. How was creativity disallowed in the USSR?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dynamo
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.Quote:
Their ideas are stifled. All they do is what they are told to do, so they become robots, slaves of the state.
It's not that it is disallowed, it is stiffled.Quote:
Originally Posted by bad manners
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.