Author Topic: Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003  (Read 2533 times)

Offline Boroda

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5755
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #45 on: April 15, 2003, 11:15:58 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Mini D
Ah.. you posted this as I was typing my reply.  I didn't see it.

Russians didn't do the looting before withdrawing, they did it when occupying several years before.  The country was too broke to stay occupied.  Iraq was never broke.  There were those that had, and those that didn't.

Also, East Germany was not a contrast in lifestiles with lavishness sitting beside extreme poverty.

nor was Russia's withdrawl/release of East Germany unforseen.  There was a large amount of preperation before hand... as well as a sense of reunion with a West Germany more than willing to help out (and realize new buisness potential).

The looting you like to point to right now is very common when a dictator is ousted.  Russia, for all of its misgivings, was never presented the same situation.  Of course, the looting is usually done by the people occupying the country... but I guess that's easy for you to dismiss.

The comparison to the Berlin wall being taken down is a bad one... that is all there is to it.  German's shouldn't take offense to it becuase it was a stupid comparison to make.

Just as "looting then and now" comparisons are also pretty stupid.

The coalition forces were somewhat unprepared for the looting that occured in Baghdad.  At some points, they actually encouraged it (even a thread here giving kudos to the brits).  So be it.... it is being resolved.

MiniD


Thank you for a nice answer.

The case is that Russian Army withdrew from Germany in 1993. Until then Soviet/Russian troops remained neutral. All the ground installations, buildings and infrastructure were left intact and passed to Germany/NATO.

As for the lootings in Iraq - It's stupid to blame the intervents. Their intentions didn't include the complete occupational administration. It's pretty obvious. Unlike, for example, anti-terrorist operation in Chechnya they simply don't need it, total control and restoring law and order isn't their aim. Saddam is gone, oil is under control - everything else should be off the list.

Offline Sabre

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3112
      • Rich Owen
What price, Freedom?
« Reply #46 on: April 15, 2003, 11:16:47 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Frogm4n
what did america sacrifice in driving the USSR into economic crap house faster then it naturally would have? The millions of jobs our defence contractors gave out? or was it the massive government spending?
of course there were some spys caught and i guess those are the few that did something that was actually dangerous.


Forgive the tone of my reply, but you have struck a nerve with this comment, Frogm4n.  I find the assertion that no sacrifice was made by America or her NATO allies in defeating communism in the Cold War both amazing and insulting!  Speaking purely in economic terms, where do you think the billions spent on the defense of North America and Europe came from?  Much came from the European NATO partners, but an appreciable percentage came from…me; a United States taxpayer and 20-year vet.  It is staggering to imagine what might have been done with the trillions of dollars spent just maintaining the defense of Europe, but that’s only the cold, hard monetary side of the equation.

However, to couch this purely in economic terms would be a dishonor to untold millions who served on active duty during that titanic struggle that was the Cold War.  No, the much more was sacrificed than mere dollars, pounds, and marks.  Suffering and sacrifice doesn’t just involve loss of life, though that certainly occurred regularly throughout the Cold War.  And I refer not just about, or even primarily about, spies.  Thousands of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines lost their lives during the 40-plus years of the Cold War.  They died in training accidents, during naval vessel collisions between USSR and NATO vessels, or simply lost their lives at the hands of the elements or chance; all died maintaining a thankless vigils in God-forsaken areas all over the globe.

But I spoke of other sacrifice as well, sacrifice that stops short of death, but is nonetheless real and measurable.  Ever pull a yearlong remote tour above the Arctic Circle, or spent years away from everything familiar and dear to you?  Ever bivouac in barren desert wastelands, or stare through barbed wire across a no-man’s land at a hostile army?  Do you know what it’s like to stand on the ice-encrusted bridge of your ship, tossed about the waters of the Barrent Straights, and wonder if you’d be home in time to see your child born (and wondering if your wife would get tired of waiting and leave you before your six-month long deployment ends)?  Ever sit a 24-hour watch, deep in the bowels of the earth, and wonder if the world you knew when you rode the elevator down to the missile launch control capsule would still exist when at last your shift was ended?  

What know you of the sacrifice made by others, so that democracy and freedom would not fade from this earth?  Little, I should think.
Sabre
"The urge to save humanity almost always masks a desire to rule it."

Offline X2Lee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #47 on: April 15, 2003, 11:18:13 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Boroda
At least we have some means to stop "the land of free" from invading us, despite of the great effort to "disarm" us. Very nice when international gangster tries to persuade us to scrap our weapons, at the same time "storing" their own.



We used a different weapon on you guys. Your free now, toodle along...

Offline Martlet

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4390
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #48 on: April 15, 2003, 11:19:08 AM »
Actually, we no longer care if Russia keeps their weapons.  We've seen how affective they are.

Offline Boroda

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5755
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #49 on: April 15, 2003, 11:19:17 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Martlet
HA!

You are safe because of the very protection we provide.  We could have our armies eating borcht in Moscow any day we chose to, and there isn't crap Russia could do about it.

Fortunately for you, that isn't our style.


10 minutes after the first invader will step on our land - it will result in a massive ICBM launch.

It's an official doctrine. We can't afford a massive convenient war with NATO, so the strategic nuclear forces are our main weapon.

Offline AWMac

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9251
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #50 on: April 15, 2003, 11:20:49 AM »
Well said Sabre!
 USArmy Ret. here. '75-'95.

:D

Offline Martlet

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4390
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #51 on: April 15, 2003, 11:22:49 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Boroda
10 minutes after the first invader will step on our land - it will result in a massive ICBM launch.

It's an official doctrine. We can't afford a massive convenient war with NATO, so the strategic nuclear forces are our main weapon.


Not a problem.  We've seen how well your weapon's work.  Those ICBM's will make it to the Pacific, if you're lucky.

Like I said, there wouldn't be crap you could do about it.

Offline Frogm4n

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2371
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #52 on: April 15, 2003, 11:23:47 AM »
our government would have had those training accidents anyways. Very minor sacrifice's were made during the cold war by the US overall, and thats why it was such a great victory. It was an economic battle that we benifited greatly from dont fool yourself. Defence contractors made billions off of it and cant wait for another.
And im glad they served on active duty to fight off an enemy that never posed a conventional warfare threat.
Your right about one thing, the civilians of the countrys of NATO and the warsaw pact sacrificed the greatest during the coldwar by paying their tax's so their governments could make countless nuclear weopons and armys that should never have been built.

Offline Boroda

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5755
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #53 on: April 15, 2003, 11:24:02 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by AWMac
Why would US invade Russia? Caviar? Ohhh Pahleez...

:D


Then why do you build airbases and long-range radar stations in Estonia? SPb is inside the effective range of NATO tactical aviation now. North-Western Russia airspace can be monitored by NATO radars. Should we understand it as an act of friendship? After mr. Rumsfeld's sentences about using military force against us if we'll try to eliminate terrorists hiding in Georgia, and open military support to a country that harbours terrorists - I doubt it.

Offline Mini D

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6897
      • Fat Drunk Bastards
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #54 on: April 15, 2003, 11:24:49 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Boroda
Did US of A remove it's troops from Europe after Evil Russians removed theirs?
LOL!  You've got to be kidding me... right?  Do you see our troops in Europe as being occupying forces?  Have they been used in a single police action in Europe even once?  Really boroda... try to come up with a single instance.  Any forces left over there are with something we in the west call "permission" from the existing soveregn "government".  To be honest, I dunno if we'll ever really be out of Europe because I don't know that Europe as a whole will ever completely trust Germany or Russia in the near future.
Quote
Can you tell me who's the enemy they oppose now? Russia maybe? Just tell it plain and straight.
They have nobody to oppose now, since Russia has shrivelled into third world status.  Of course, as soon as that happens, they lose the "common enemy" mentality and return back to the behavior that made Europe a wonderland in the 20th century.  The nationalism will start creeping back to pre-ww1 levels shortly.  America will be hated by the Germans and French.  Belgium will just want to be left alone.  Austria will insist they are the most genetically pure.  Northwestern Europe will continue to pump out beatifull blond females and dare you to brave the frozen countryside to come and get them.

America did not create the hatred found in Europe by occupying it.  Its always been there.  Hatred for anyone more than 50 miles from where you live.  Even moreso for lands more than 1000 miles away.

The British are the only Europeans to be above this at the time.  I don't call they lackies or allies.  I simply view them as a country that is confident enough not to be affected by the insecurities of nationalism.  Sure there is patriotism, but the nationalistic mentality is not the predominant view.

MiniD

Offline Martlet

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4390
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #55 on: April 15, 2003, 11:25:46 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Boroda
Then why do you build airbases and long-range radar stations in Estonia? SPb is inside the effective range of NATO tactical aviation now. North-Western Russia airspace can be monitored by NATO radars. Should we understand it as an act of friendship? After mr. Rumsfeld's sentences about using military force against us if we'll try to eliminate terrorists hiding in Georgia, and open military support to a country that harbours terrorists - I doubt it.


understand it however you want.

We could care less.

Offline Boroda

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5755
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #56 on: April 15, 2003, 11:28:10 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Martlet
Not a problem.  We've seen how well your weapon's work.  Those ICBM's will make it to the Pacific, if you're lucky.

Like I said, there wouldn't be crap you could do about it.


C'mon, then try it.

Then don't say that I didn't warn you.

Surely your "free media" will not show you a Russian ICBM launched at Central Russia and hitting a 6m circle painted on the ground at Kamchatka.

Offline AWMac

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9251
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #57 on: April 15, 2003, 11:28:30 AM »
LOL It's the aircraft that you can't see Broda that should make you lie awake in bed. :eek:


:D

Offline Martlet

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4390
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #58 on: April 15, 2003, 11:31:29 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Boroda
C'mon, then try it.

Then don't say that I didn't warn you.

Surely your "free media" will not show you a Russian ICBM launched at Central Russia and hitting a 6m circle painted on the ground at Kamchatka.


Like I ALSO said, that's not our style.

Quit rattling your sabre.  I agree, USSR was a proud and powerful nation.

Russia is a 3rd world dung heap.  Their military sucks.  Their equipment sucks.  They can't even beat the Chechs.

Offline Boroda

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5755
Comparison: Berlin 1989 vs Baghdad 2003
« Reply #59 on: April 15, 2003, 11:32:17 AM »
MiniD, do you really think that US forces are in Europe only for charity?... :rolleyes:

Americans are practical people. I doubt they act out of altruistic motivations in this case.

In fact I wish our "Kremlin dreamers" could use 10% of American practicism. :(