Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on August 27, 2003, 10:15:09 AM
-
With all things considered abroad, was it (in your opinion) a good thing that Truman, Ike, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan and their respective administrations tried to prevent communism from spreading? I'm not speaking in terms of specifically how the prevention was executed, but in terms of "Was the move to prevent it from spreading in the best interests of the United States and World peace?"
What would have happened if we had not made a stand in Berlin(Berlin Airlift)? How about Korea in 1950? How would the world be today had we just let some of these nations that had Soviet Union support go at it without intervention?
Was it good, or a total waste of taxpayers dollars?
-
My short answer is that it was good and it also helped drive our industries, technology and economy.
-
I think communism stopped itself from spreading.
-
"I'm not speaking in terms of specifically how the prevention was executed, but in terms of "Was the move to prevent it from spreading in the best interests of the United States and World peace?"
Question for you then.
Was Mao Tse Tung good for China? Ignoring all of the "bad communism" rethoric and how he used force to achieve his goals of course.
Loaded question?
Yup.
-
communism is bad... mmmmmkay.
MiniD
-
What would the world be like today if we, the US, had not done ANYTHING?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
What would the world be like today if we, the US, had not done ANYTHING?
Sixpense would be sent to a re-education clinic for speaking out against Comrade Clinton in so sarcastic a manner.
-
We'd all live happily in Oceania guided by our beloved Premier Mr Bush. Anyone who could not toe the line in our People's Utopia would be sent to the front lines fo the fight against Eurasia or Eastasia.
-
Originally posted by Westy
We'd all live happily in Oceania guided by our beloved Premier Mr Bush. Anyone who could not toe the line in our People's Utopia would be sent to the front lines fo the fight against Eurasia or Eastasia.
Sounds like a Liberal paradise!
Stay tuned for the 2 minutes of hate!
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
What would the world be like today if we, the US, had not done ANYTHING?
My crystal ball is in for repairs.
My decision ball says "Mute point".
;)
-
We will never know
Only answer i can think of that is 100% correct.
-
it's spelled moot.... :D
and be sure you don't confuse "Comunisim" with "Stalinism" huge diffrance.... Problem is extremiteis ... why can't we have a happy mix of social democracy; If the coutries that tried communisim didn't go all out, they might have had better luck ... (or if US sanctions didn't stifle them)
Total capitalism is a bad thing too .... did someone say strip mine? Hope you see what i mean about extreamties..
-
Westy, that'd be double plus ungood.
In response to the original thread, I think it was a good thing. With 20/20 hindsight, I think some of the steps taken ended up backfiring*, but that the US maintained the stance and too the actions it did was for the better.
* Who needs a Shah? Whoops....
-
Originally posted by Manedew
it's spelled moot.... :D
Correct..my bad.
-
I think communism was a good idea perhaps back in the day but it's way too easily abused by corrupt leaders. IMO
-
I've always thought of Communism as simply being a mask worn by oppressive governments. "People's Republics" aren't for the people, but rather for the leaders who control their people's freedoms of ownership and economic livelihood.
So was the US and NATO right in stopping it? Sure. Otherwise we would've had to invade more countries to free them from their oppressors. :p
-
So far, sounds like a few are afraid to commit an answer either way. So I'll be the first.
I think it was a good thing for the US and other NATO nations to put their foot down when they did. If they hadn't, Europe might have been overran had the US shown any docile tendancies.
-
depends
if you are lazy, don't want to get ahead, do enough just to get by, think everyone should be equal no matter what - communism is your cup of tea
heck -just describe the average handsomehunkcrat/liberal :)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
So far, sounds like a few are afraid to commit an answer either way. So I'll be the first.
I think it was a good thing for the US and other NATO nations to put their foot down when they did. If they hadn't, Europe might have been overran had the US shown any docile tendancies.
No kidding?:D
But I do like the way "other NATO nations" slipped in there.
"What would the world be like today if we, the US, had not done ANYTHING?" - it wasn't in here, or your original post.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
What would the world be like today if we, the US, had not done ANYTHING?
Well, I don't think we'd see Boroda on this BBS as much, as he'd surely be busy in his post as the Supreme Soviet Information Minister. :D
SOB
-
OOH!!! I see this turning into a "We spent tons of years and dollars promoting democracy over communism so lets spend tons of years and dollars promoting democracy over radical religious fundamentalism!" thread.
Actually, I agree with that statement
-
Communism could never exist in the first place without a monarchy or Capitalistic system gone bad. It's all about the have not's against the have's.
Had we not done anything, we'd probably have much more "friendlier" relations with a few more communist countries (such as we're having with China).
Would we have become a Communist country? Nope.
BTW, the US is a Socialistic/Capitalistic country.
-
Communism, in ALL it variations was responsible for 100 million deaths in the 20th Century. If stopping that was wrong, "I don't wanna be right"
-
Kommunysm is no thet to the Capitelizm, ist plane juzt ridikulus!
(http://unprompted.com/share/camus/communism.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Curval
No kidding?:D
But I do like the way "other NATO nations" slipped in there.
"What would the world be like today if we, the US, had not done ANYTHING?" - it wasn't in here, or your original post.
Considering the US is/was a Super power...I am saying NATO wouldn't be if it hadn't been for the US...and I believe the Soviets would have control of all of western Europe had we, the US, been passive.
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
Communism could never exist in the first place without a monarchy or Capitalistic system gone bad.
Just to clarify, capitalism only really succeeds where there is a democratic style of government and all people feel that they have some say in how they're ruled. Freedom of ownership is a cornerstone in a capitalistic economy. Most true monarchies are based on the idea that the monarch owns everything, or could own everything if they so chose.
As I mentioned before, Communism is simply a mask used by oppressors seeking to loot for their own gains by forcing owners to surrender their property to the state. Communism uses a centralized economy - the Communist state owns everything. Capitalism doesn't.
I don't think I've ever heard of an instance of capitalism going bad. In the case of Vietnam, it was a matter of anti-colonial sentiments in a country recovering from a war. Ho Chi Minh just happened to keep his political infrastructure in place while the other politicians were more concerned with the here-and-now rather than looking forward.
-
this is a dumb question.
OF COURSE IT WAS A GOOD THING
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Considering the US is/was a Super power...I am saying NATO wouldn't be if it hadn't been for the US...and I believe the Soviets would have control of all of western Europe had we, the US, been passive.
Wasn't NATO a response to the Warsaw Pact? Had it not been for that, I think the countries in NATO probably would've banded together in some form anyway.
-
Originally posted by gofaster
Wasn't NATO a response to the Warsaw Pact? Had it not been for that, I think the countries in NATO probably would've banded together in some form anyway.
hmm... always thought it was the other way around
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Considering the US is/was a Super power...I am saying NATO wouldn't be if it hadn't been for the US...and I believe the Soviets would have control of all of western Europe had we, the US, been passive.
You said this:
Quote -
I think it was a good thing for the US and other NATO nations to put their foot down when they did.
It really doesn't matter though...let me just say THANK YOU AMERICA for preventing the spread of Communism.
Isn't that what you were after when you started this thread?
(and yea....I'm just trying to yank your chain...no pun intended):p
-
Originally posted by Preon1
hmm... always thought it was the other way around
You may be right. Military posturing and political treaties that didn't involve shooting never really held much interest for me.
-
Curval said: "It really doesn't matter though...let me just say THANK YOU AMERICA for preventing the spread of Communism. Isn't that what you were after when you started this thread?"
Actually, the thought for this thread came from the LBJ thread. Blame was laid on everyone for Vietnam from Truman to LBJ. But getting to the heart of the matter, the very act of preventing communism from spreading in Korea, Vietnam and even our own country, came from the will of the American people and its Gov't. And the question arose....was that a good thing? I think most of us can honestly say "Yes", although can the cost be measured in lives lost? I think not.
-
So who's to blame for cancelling Jet Warrior - Vietnam? I've still got my $45 waiting for its release.
-
Originally posted by gofaster
So who's to blame for cancelling Jet Warrior - Vietnam?
LBJ!
-
...ahh yes..the LBJ thread. I opened it up and realised it was another Democrat vs Republican b*tch fest.
I try and stay out of them because I am not an American.
-
Originally posted by Curval
...ahh yes..the LBJ thread. I opened it up and realised it was another Democrat vs Republican b*tch fest.
I try and stay out of them because I am not an American.
Well, you *look* American, and you talk like an American, but you sure as hell don't hit your target like an American! :p
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Well, you *look* American, and you talk like an American, but you sure as hell don't hit your target like an American! :p
are you kidding me? He's about as fuzzy and foreign as they come!
http://www.carlspackler.com/sounds/071.wav
-
..ummm
DAMN!
No come back on that one.:D
-
lol Oct.
Got the second draft btw...many thanks.
-
Communism is the source of all evil.
Even worse than Terrorism or Cataclysm.
If you suspect someone you know is a communist, please call the authorities, ok?
-
Hey dont forget to thank the british and the Russians and Germans.
They stopped the french from spreading too!
but that was waaay back then... ;)
-
I'm someone who looks at the /theory/ of communism and thinks, "In an idealistic world, this would be great and wonderful."
Then thinks. "In the real world, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
Communism: It looks good on paper, but toss human nature into the mix and you're in for a reeeal bad time.
-
This is like asking was it right to oppose the axis in WW2...
There is no possible answer except for yes.
SaburoS you must be one of the most misinformed people in the world. If the USA and west didnt oppose communism there would have been no west berlin - stalins blocade in 48 would have taken care of that, there would have been no Taiwan - an economic powerhouse providing high standard of living to her citizens and hi tech innovations overseas, same for south korea - the communists would have taken care of those. Then of course lets look at the lives of soviet citizens. With no western counterbalance and opposition communism would have spread its wonderful humane policies to hundreds of millions even billions more people, they would get to know the love of the KGB and no freedom. Eventually, feeling free to act with no consequences they would start a general world war to take everyhing. Remember the goal of communsm ever since lenin was always world revolution - meaning communist world domination. And you argue not opposing then would have been better for world relations. Simply idiotic!
-
Originally posted by kesolei
I'm someone who looks at the /theory/ of communism and thinks, "In an idealistic world, this would be great and wonderful."
Then thinks. "In the real world, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
Communism: It looks good on paper, but toss human nature into the mix and you're in for a reeeal bad time.
Yep great observation there! :)
But we know they also knew that, and so tried their best to remove all tracers of humanity from their populations. They destroed the family structure, destroyed religions, suppressed ethinc identies, forbade freedom of thought, frredom of ownership and self intest, freedom of choice and expression. Of course they also simply tried to remove masses of humans from the system alltogether. Communism is simple slavery, all it has ever been and all it will be. It is by far the greatest evil of all time, nothing comes close....
And knowing supporters of communism, on ANY scale are all responsible for its crimes.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Simply idiotic!
I'm gonna have to take offense for him.
First of all, he has a different opinion- that doesn't mean his idea is simply idiotic. It just means you don't agree with it.
See, we only know this future and this result of our actions. Who's to say that if we didn't step up and doing anything about communism, that it wouldn't have folded over on itself? Who's to say that from the ashes of communism when it didn't work, we wouldn't have had just as ingenius people step up and create something even /better/ than what we have right now? Who's to say communism wouldn't have worked in the end? I mean, chances are it would have crumbled and been not pretty.. but what if it worked and survived? No one knows!
A mystery of life.
-
I had 80 years to work. It didnt worrk anywhere, not once, not for one second. It was a crime from the start, nothing but a scheme to steal power and murder. Name one communist country where that did not happend. Even china is now a capitalist leaning society, its the only way the communist party is still in power. So even his grand example of a succesful communist country has admitted defeat.
But kes how bout you just let him defend doing nothing in opposition to the communist invasion of south korea...
THERE IS NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING GOOD ABOUT IT.
He is being Idiotic.
My point is some ideas are simply idiotic, no matter what... His is one of them.
-
I'll let him defend that, Grun.. but I still think that you're being amazingly rude to say that something someone thinks is 'Simply idiotic!' Just one of those... manners things your mom might have wanted to teach you about? Polite debate tends to work better, where you're open to others opinions.. he /may/ have a good point when he defends his idea. But by saying what he thinks is simply idiotic, where's the invitiation to defend reasonably?
Sorry if I'm being out of place by trying to, I dunno.. keep things polite.
(And as for what I said before- just the what if stuff, that's all it is. All logic points to the downfall of communism and it being a bad thing, I understand that and am personally glad we didn't leave things be. But on the other hand, I don't have to think what we did was the absolute right thing. By stopping communism then and not letting it play itself out, we may have sold ourselves short on something even better than what we have now. Who knows!)
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
BTW How do you view this statement?
All nigerrs should die!
My point is some ideas are simply idiotic, no matter what... His is one of them.
You added that after I responded- And I'll tell you what I think.
You're entitled to your own opinion. I don't agree with it, but for all I know you grew up in a town where you were a white minority and had african americans beat the crap out of you every day. You'd have a valid reason to think what you do that I couldn't really argue with. Don't like it, don't agree.. but I don't think its simply idiotic. No idea, or thought, is ever simply idiotic. If the person had the guts to say what they think, you might as well respect it.
And that's all I'm saying on this.
-
So you dont think that idea is idiotic? Are you a racist?
-
Originally posted by kesolei
You'd have a valid reason to think what you do that I couldn't really argue with. Don't like it, don't agree.. but I don't think its simply idiotic. No idea, or thought, is ever simply idiotic. If the person had the guts to say what they think, you might as well respect it.
And that's all I'm saying on this.
Heres another one for you to consider, perhaps this will hit closer to home...
Only a woman could say such a stupid thing...
Kes some ideas are simply wrong and idiotic, thats my point..
-
Originally posted by Preon1
OOH!!! I see this turning into a "We spent tons of years and dollars promoting democracy over communism so lets spend tons of years and dollars promoting democracy over radical religious fundamentalism!" thread.
Actually, I agree with that statement
Right on! Shall we start with that idiot judge in Alabama?
-
where is Boroda when you need him? He is a true source of truth and can set us all straight on this matter for sure!
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
This is like asking was it right to oppose the axis in WW2...
There is no possible answer except for yes.
SaburoS you must be one of the most misinformed people in the world. If the USA and west didnt oppose communism there would have been no west berlin - stalins blocade in 48 would have taken care of that, there would have been no Taiwan - an economic powerhouse providing high standard of living to her citizens and hi tech innovations overseas, same for south korea - the communists would have taken care of those. Then of course lets look at the lives of soviet citizens. With no western counterbalance and opposition communism would have spread its wonderful humane policies to hundreds of millions even billions more people, they would get to know the love of the KGB and no freedom. Eventually, feeling free to act with no consequences they would start a general world war to take everyhing. Remember the goal of communsm ever since lenin was always world revolution - meaning communist world domination. And you argue not opposing then would have been better for world relations. Simply idiotic!
So how many innocent people have been killed in the fight against the so called communism threat (El Salvador, Honduras, Guatamala, Nicaragua, Vietnam, etc. just to name a few)?
There's been blood spilt on both sides in this "War against Communism."
We seem to be tolerating communist China fine, and you know what? We aren't at war with them. If the Chinese people feel they no longer want a communist govt, they can overthrow it.
Fact is the United States has always needed a scapegoat of an enemy throughout its history.
The native indians. The British and French. The Spanish. The Mexicans. The Communists. The drug cartels. Sadaam. Some Muslims. Al Quaida.
We're just not happy and "complete" without having an enemy to hate.
Wonder who our next "great enemy" is going to be?
Why do we still have an economic blockade of Cuba? Seems we are so scared of their actually succeeding that we need to use our resources to try and make it fail.
LOL., you think that because a country is communist that all of a sudden they get along with all other communist countries? Vietnam and China (for example) has been having border disputes for how long now?
Doesn't matter the ideology of the countries involved.
The Soviet Union didn't have the resources to take over all of Europe.
We never use propaganda?
You think that peoples of sovereign nations would just allow them to take over their country without a fight?
It isn't the invading that's hard but the occupying. We learned that in Nicaragua in the early '30s, Vietnam in the 60's-70's, now Iraq. The Soviets learned in Afghanistan in the early '80's.
Bottom line is that if a regime is bad enough to its own people, the people will revolt and replace it with a system they want.
Were some of the leadership in the Soviet govt corrupt?
How about some of our leadership here in the US?
It's a much bigger and deeper issue.
Bottom line is I feel the trillions of dollars spent in our cold war could have been used to much greater benefit for the world in general and especially our own US citizens.
LOL, seems you have trouble arguing without throwing labels around---how typical of you. Am I offended? Not at all. It would actually be shocking to me to see you not throw labels around in arguing your side. I guess you feel your argument can't stand on its own merits without the added insult here and there. By all means carry on ;)
-
BTW, never said that a totalitarian communist govt was a good thing. If we humans were ants it would work, but it goes counter to our human nature to succeed and excel. Generalizing of coarse.
-
Bottom line is that if a regime is bad enough to its own people, the people will revolt and replace it with a system they want.
LOLOLOL! tell that to the people slaughtered in Tianamen Square.
-
BECAUSE SOME OF YOU APRENTLY CAN"T READ I'LL TYPE IN CAPS........
COMMUNISIM IS NOT STALINISM OR A DEPOTISM .... WHAT THE SOVIETS MADE HAD VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH MARX IN TH END. MANY OF YOU STILL CALL IT COMMUNISM WHILE ADMITING IT WAS DICTATORSHIP.
TRUELY A PALE IMITAITON OF THE VISION; MOSTLY FOR PROPOGANDA..... THE VISION MAY BE FLAWED ... BUT DO NOT CONFUSE IT WITH THE "COLD WAR" USSR; 'CAUSE THAT AIN'T COMMUNISM IN THE 'TRUE' SENSE.
oh ya and if you want a nice responsobility/guilt trip .... UN sanctions resulted in some half million Iraqi children dieing in the last ten years. Wonder why they got bombed?
-
Originally posted by NUKE
LOLOLOL! tell that to the people slaughtered in Tianamen Square.
How about the Nicaraguans that deposed Somoza, Philipinos that deposed Marcos, Iranians that deposed the Shah, Cubans that deposed Batista supported dictators, and of course, the Americans that kicked out the British govt.
When a majority of the Chinese people want to overthrow their present govt, they will.
-
Mane I'm tired of that excuse for the incessant failire of communism - every time it was tried no matter what the basic movement was it ended up as dicatorship or oligarchy. And it always will, the second you try to make all people "equal" you will need people to enforvce and administer that "equality." These people will have to keep down those who are ambitious work harder thus "cheat", also they will have administrative jobs of great responsibility and power and they will naturaly begin to abuse that power as they have always done.
But for the sake of arguing tell us all how your "true" communism would work in the real world.
SaburoS i sure would have been nice to spend those billions on other things but nuclear weapons and generally keep thew demobilization after ww2, but nobody really told the communists that at the end of ww2. I suppose ypu wanted unilatteral disarmament by the USA while russians and their buddies ran amock in the world..
-
Originally posted by Westy
We'd all live happily in Oceania guided by our beloved Premier Mr Bush. Anyone who could not toe the line in our People's Utopia would be sent to the front lines fo the fight against Eurasia or Eastasia.
The funniest thing is that Orwell wrote "1984" about his vision if Western society.
Another thing is that maaany people mention "1984" talking to me, but fail to reognize this brilliant book when I quote it... :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Manedew
it's spelled moot.... :D
and be sure you don't confuse "Comunisim" with "Stalinism" huge diffrance.... Problem is extremiteis ... why can't we have a happy mix of social democracy; If the coutries that tried communisim didn't go all out, they might have had better luck ... (or if US sanctions didn't stifle them)
Total capitalism is a bad thing too .... did someone say strip mine? Hope you see what i mean about extreamties..
Any political system has it's pros and cons.
I'll better substitute "communism" here with "bolshevism", not "stalinism". Stalinism was probably the most effective and sane implementation of Comminist ideology. Compare what Stalin have done to Trotsky's ideas or to what Mao have done to China, or Pol Pot to Cambodia...
-
Stalinism was probably the most effective and sane implementation of Comminist ideology.
There was nothing sane about Stalinism.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
depends
if you are lazy, don't want to get ahead, do enough just to get by, think everyone should be equal no matter what - communism is your cup of tea
heck -just describe the average handsomehunkcrat/liberal :)
Well, I have to agree here, especially knowing that you don't know what "Communism" means and using this word to describe authoritary states with Soviet-style socialism. People who were sitting holes in their pants from 9 to 6 and earning their guaranteed salary and accomodation are the first in lines of our contemporary commies, wishing to take away everything from people who work their prettythang off.
OTOH, in Soviet times we had millions of people doing their jobs on any conditions, just for fun and self-satisfaction. The difference between stalinism and late-Soviet "developed socialism" was that stalinism relied on that enthusiasts, while in 70s-80s such people were dangerous and not welcome by Party olygarchy. Unfortunately, it was inevitable, because of social development and relative growth of "prosperity"... This is a very complicated problem, hard to explain such things in English. :(
To be short: stalinism was a regime built for emergency situations, and it was the most effective economical solution in human history. When the goals were reached and social tension was released - the society lost it's motivation and didn't find new idea to follow, that led to social and economical stagnation followed by the collapse of late 80s-early 90s.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
There was nothing sane about Stalinism.
There is a good quote from sir Winston: "Stalin got Russia with a plowshare, and left it with an atomic bomb".
There was a problem: the country could be destroyed, and population eliminated. The problem was solved.
Stalin was a pragmatic. Stalinism can be defined as a system where people are granted with infinite authority, but, OTOH, with infinite responsibility. This was the only system that could survive in a War and then, 12 years after it ended, reconstructed the completely destroyed economics and industry and reached into Space.
It was a cruel time, but the price was survival of the whole nation. I wish such times will never return.
BTW, the worst thing in Comminist theory was Stalin's "elimination of state by it's enforcing". Sounded like he was tampering with the basics of Communist religion to justify his methods.
-
Paranoid Americans :eek:
-
Originally posted by SOB
Well, I don't think we'd see Boroda on this BBS as much, as he'd surely be busy in his post as the Supreme Soviet Information Minister. :D
SOB
You have to read something about Soviet political system.
Supreme Soviet (BTW, did you know that "soviet" is translated as "council"? ;)) was a parliament of USSR. Council (soviet) of Ministers was an administration (government) of USSR. Press, media and information were controlled by State committees.
;)
-
Originally posted by Otto
Communism, in ALL it variations was responsible for 100 million deaths in the 20th Century. If stopping that was wrong, "I don't wanna be right"
Did anyone count how many people were killed by "capitalism"? Estimated around billion deaths in XX century...
-
Originally posted by gofaster
Wasn't NATO a response to the Warsaw Pact? Had it not been for that, I think the countries in NATO probably would've banded together in some form anyway.
Beautiful.
NATO was founded in 1949, Warsaw treaty was signed in 1955.
Agressive Western anticommunist, antidemocratic policy in their occupation zones led to separation of Germany, many local conflicts and finaly to cold war. This is obvious. WE didn't start it. Just check the dates.