could USSR have been saved? (mature audiences only)

[detch01]

Originally posted by Boroda
Detch, list of American aggressive military actions in XX century in 10 times longer. And again - you lie. All actions you losted were successfull. Baltic states joined the Union after a legitimate democratic procedure.

USSR never was a "military empire which was controlled in Moscow". You have been told so to justify your own aggressive "crusade against communism". It's obvious.

Funny that you are sure that you can teache me about evilness of USSR. You saw it on TV, I lived inside it. Part of my family is from "evily opressed and starved" Ukraine. I expect you to tell me how opressed my family was.

Nowhere in this thread have I made that claim that the soviet empire was evil (until now). As a matter of fact I made no comparison to the USSR and the USA, or USA's history of gun-boat diplomacy in the Americas or around the world. These are entirely yours and irrelevent to the founding post of this thread. Your personal experiences living in Russia while it was the principal member and chief enforcer of the USSR are irrelevant to my arguments and the initial question in this thread, unless of course you were intimately involved in the high-level decision making. As are my mine on my side of the fence. What is relevent are the historical facts.
As for me, I'm an old cold-warrior.  And I do hold the opinion that the USSR was an oppressive tyranny and that opinion is justified by an objective look at the history of the Russian "socialist" experiment from 1920 onwards. There is little difference between the soviet empire and the empires of the other European powers of the 19th century. Having said that the soviet experience was arguably still a better one for the people of Russia than they had living under the czars.
As for the legitimatacy of the "democratic" process in the Baltic states, you can perhaps provide independant proofs? After all, the only people in the world that I know of that actually consider that process a democratic one are Russians. The people of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania somehow seem to have had a different view of the process.
And I don't believe you honestly expect me to believe that Aphganistan was a victory.... Or the two wars against Finland. The next thing you know you'll be expecting me to believe there was no non-aggression pact between Hitler and Stalin and that the Poles willing ceded the eastern half of Poland to the USSR in 1939.
Re: the Ukraine. The artificially created famine and intentional starvation of peasant farmers who resisted the collectivization of farms is historical fact. What is uncertain is the number of victims, but it is likely between 3 and 6 million who were starved to death. Whether or not your family experienced this I do not know, but their experience (or lack of it) was most likely due to their support or opposition to the collectivization process if they were farming. I suppose their experience would also have been due to their support of or opposition to the party if they were not on the farm.


asw

[Flit]

Originally posted by Boroda
There was Russian Empire, in 1918 it lost Poland and Finland, then independant republics appeared like RSFSR, Ukraine, Far-East republic etc. On Dec. 30, 1922, a treaty was signed, founding the Union of Soviet Socialistic Republics. The Repuclics were: Russian Soviet Federative Socialistic Republic, Ukrainian, Belorussian and Trans-Caucasian Soviet Socialistic Republics.

By 1940 there were 16 republics. During and after Great Patriotic War some other countries and terrirories were included into Republics after proper democratic procedures (Tuva) or annexed (Kaliningrad region). In 1956 (IIRC) Karelo-Finnish republic was

In 1991 local political leaders, speculating on declared right of every Republic to leave the Union, announced "independance". USSR ceased to exist. Inheritor of the USSR was RSFSR in 1991 borders, after Yeltsin't coup in 1993 renamed into Russian Federation.

So, Soviet Union as one state felt apart. Is it clear?

For me it means that half of my family now leaves abroad. Good reason to pity good old USSR.

No.
 Sorry, but that tells that it fell apart, not what You think caused it to fall apart.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Vad
Just for the record. I'am Russian, was born in Leningrad and was living there for 35 years. So I am old enough to remeber socialism, Brezhnev, Andropov, Gorbachev, etc.

I want to say that quoted statement is incorrect. I don't think that Gorbachev did something wrong. Moreover, polls in Russia show that only about 30% of population wish back to USSR. I am sure that similar polls in  former Soviet Republics would show much less percentage

I only shared my presonal experience. Everyone from rich businessmen to Georgian taxi-drivers hate that two bastards.

As for polls - their only goal is to manipulate public opinion.

I don't pretend to be a final wisdom, but even people who live much better now then in Soviet times wish Gorby to be tortured to death for what he did.

[Vad]

Originally posted by Boroda
I only shared my presonal experience. Everyone from rich businessmen to Georgian taxi-drivers hate that two bastards.

As for polls - their only goal is to manipulate public opinion.

I don't pretend to be a final wisdom, but even people who live much better now then in Soviet times wish Gorby to be tortured to death for what he did.

It is your opinion, and you have right to have it now thanks to Gorbachev. I just want to let our American friends know  that there are other opinions. Among my friends and relatives there are just few who want USSR back  and who blame Gorbachev and Yeltsin for what they did.

Actually, it means that Russia becomes democratic country - we are allowed to have and actually have different opinions.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Flit
No.
 Sorry, but that tells that it fell apart, not what You think caused it to fall apart.

sorry.

It felt apart because local leaders prefered to be a king in a ****hole then to be on a second place in a great country. It was a result of irresposible policy of Gorby and gang, like sending troops everywhere but being too scared to use them. In 88-91 I had tanks going behind my windows at least 5 times (I live on Leningrad highway, so they woke me up at 5AM). National policy was a chain of failures and crimes, like sending troops to Baku to restore order only after several days of slaughter, when there were already no Armenians to protect.

So-called "economical collapse" was caused by absolutely incompetent leadership, it's a long story, but prime-minister Ryzhkov did his best to ruin consumer market.

In general - all Gorby's attempts to look civilised ended up in hardening living  conditions for population. Soviet joke: Perestroyka and Glasnost' for a dog - a chain is 1m longer, a food dish moved 2m away so it's unreachable now, but you are allowed to bark as loud as you can.

It's all about trading basic rights for all that idiotic "freedom of press" etc.

The whole story is much more complicated and probably hard to understand for people unaquainted with Soviet life.

To explain it all I'll have to write a book, oh, sorry - two books, one - about how it was, and another - about what was done wrong.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Vad
It is your opinion, and you have right to have it now thanks to Gorbachev. I just want to let our American friends know  that there are other opinions. Among my friends and relatives there are just few who want USSR back  and who blame Gorbachev and Yeltsin for what they did.

Actually, it means that Russia becomes democratic country - we are allowed to have and actually have different opinions.

Frankly speaking - me and millions of other people will prefer to have food, accomodation, education and medical care instead of current right to bark as loud as we can.

"Democracy" in American meaning is only a way to increase coca-cola and chewing-gum sales.

[lazs2]

and you somehow feel that you are incapable of achieveing all these things and so must turn to an autoritarian socialist government to provide for you?

didn't work last time.... why will it work this time?  what will your benevolent government do differently?

lazs

[Estel]

Originally posted by lazs2
and you somehow feel that you are incapable of achieveing all these things and so must turn to an autoritarian socialist government to provide for you?

didn't work last time.... why will it work this time?  what will your benevolent government do differently?

lazs

Lazs, you just don't understand one thing wich is clear for us. We don't need Coca-Cola and right of speach if we have nothing to eat. "Autoritarian Socialist goverment" did a lot of wrong things. But at the same time, the population didn't starvate. And you knew that at evening you can go to the shop and buy food without problems.
When Gorby-El'tsin team seized to rule, the population began starve. And not because of the strange diet. But because of that team just ruined economical system.
How do you think, do you need food for your kids or an abstract "democracy principals" wich bring you to situation, when you have nothing to feed your children? For me it's clear.
And another thing. ATA is right. "Motherland" means for us something more even just the place where you live. And we always issue that maybe we'll live better/worse, but we'll live here. Not looking onto political principals. And we do not need principals wich are extraneous to us. Just because of you live somewhere over the ocean and we live here. With our own rules and principals.

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by Boroda
I feel like I need a smiley that isn't in a window to the left.

Problem is, you seem to be a pathological liar.  You deny and refuse to give an inch, you are the "Katayn Expert, WMD Expert, Chernobyl Cleanup Expert, KGB Expert, the Communism was great for us Expert", and anything else you've spewed in here over the years.

I don't a smiley, I post facts.  

Karaya

[Masherbrum]

Then join a Communist club, set up an agenda and run in an Election.  Become Dictator then.   Stop crying over spilled milk, and do something about it.

Karaya

PS - Flit, you'll go round and round with Boroda.  He is the "end-all, know-it-all" you're just wasting your time.   He can tap dance with Mikhail Baryshnikov.

[Vad]

Ok, I'm Russian, and old enough to remeber Socialism, Brezhnev, Andropov, KGB, etc.

Originally posted by tikky
Could USSR have been saved or was it beyond repair or just too late?

No, it was impossible. And it was not the timing problem, it was by design.

Could USSR have been like the current Peoples Republic of China if USSR survived?

I know what happened in 82-89 in the USSR, and I predict that China will get the same or very similar end. And it will be the end of the world as we know it. Pray that they will get their own Gorbachev, but there are few chances that it will happen. More likely the world will get new Franko or Pinochet, but with A-bomb and 1/4 of the Earth population.

To explain or prove that I need a lot of time and people who are really want to know how it was and why it happened.  Most of folks here just want to prove that the USSR was Empire of Evil, and I have no intentions to argue with them.

[GRUNHERZ]

Asking for yet another chance to do it "right," the sign of a truly brainwashed communist.

[Suave]

I notice both estel and boroda bring up the "food or freedom" choice. If you value life more than liberty you could be happy there? I wonder how people who valued freedom of speech more than food got along in old ussr.

Actually I don't wonder at all. It's history.

Do a google search about Ukrainian farmers who didn't want to give up their farms to state collectivisation.

Here's one of the many links.

http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/soviet.exhibit/famine.html

[GRUNHERZ]

Suave those were odd deviants, thankfully they learned quickly.

[Vad]

Originally posted by Suave
I notice both estel and boroda bring up the "food or freedom" choice. If you value life more than liberty you could be happy there? I wonder how people who valued freedom of speech more than food got along in old ussr.

Actually I don't wonder at all. It's history.

Do a google search about Ukrainian farmers who didn't want to give up their farms to state collectivisation.

Here's one of the many links.

http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/soviet.exhibit/famine.html

Sueve, you just don't understand what are you talking about. Did you ever starve? Not for diet purpose, not because of lost of canned SPAM in camp.

You have a full time job, you are working 8 hours 5 days a week. You make a lot of money. After the work you visit supermarket, and there is NOTHING there. Absolutelly nothing, all shelfs are empty. You have full pocket of useless money but you can't buy anything. You come back home, and you see your 2 years old daughter who cries because she is hungry. She needs milk, or bread , or anything what is suitable to put into the stomach. But you have nothing. You see your wife, but you don't want to look into her eyes....

And you definitly know that this situation won't change tomorrow. Or next week. Or in any time in the near future. There is no food in this country! And you don't have passport and visa to leave this country, or just go abroad to eat SOMETHING! You have money, a lot of money but they cost nothing, you can't use them anywhere.

No, actually you can. There is "black market" but prices there so high that you can spend your monthly salary to buy bottle of milk for your daughter. Finally you will do that, because it is impossible to hear cry of your child 24x7 and see how she is dying. And after that you realize that you have no money for the next 2 weeks. No money at all.  And there are no places around where you can steal something, and there is no reason to rob your neighbors because they have nothing to take from them.

And you would think about "freedom of speech" in that circumstances?