The French are Evil!

[shartley]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What state do you live in CB? The State of Denial!

Originally posted by aaron_mag


No offense taken. I even concede your points about the democrats finding someone to beat Bush and the fact that they have been flailing around (and not looking too good). They would be better to focus on a platform based on stronger diplomacy and a different economic stimulus package. Still my gut tells me Bush is not as strong as is widely believed and he will lose this next round. Of course I am in the Oregon which is not a state with strong backing for Bush so my perception is probably totally skewed:). You, 1de, and FOL will probably be mocking me come election time. Actually you guys will be mocking me no matter what the outcome! All that remains to be seen is if you will be adding presidential election predictions to your list of mockable offenses.

[aaron_mag]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What state do you live in CB? The State of Denial!

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
Come on, Clinton had to be laughing so hard he wet his pants when Dole won the nomination!

A disturbing but funny image comes to my mind....

Originally posted by Shartley

I don't see it that differently. I like balance of power. In my mind one side has a little too much power for my taste....

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife



WTF drugs are you on? Seriously? Is your schooling that bad that you really believe this?

1DE nailed it. Ronaldus Magnus brought the commie bastards to their knees by the mere THREAT of SDI. The commie bastards couldn't afford the escalation in weapons platform technologies to keep up with the US.

And here's something for you to choke on kid, before you spout your usual drivel, think about this, MOST of us actually LIVED through the cold war before YOU were even BORN.

If Russia, later the USSR would have had their revolution in the right time, place, and space, then they could have keep up with the US and IMO could have surpassed them for the USSR had WAY more natural resources then the US. Way better possibilities at a higher industrial output. It is funny you all are arguing this even though you all are so wrong it isn't funny.

How could the Soviet Union be brought to their knees by a lack of money in one sector when they had their entire existence that way.

Rebel, you want me to prove to you that the general mood in the US before PH was one of isolation?

yes FOL, if the GP, like they would have, made the US pull troops from Germany then they would be wrong. But I also said most of the time, and this thread clearly points that out.

[m-98]

I think that the Reps. and Dems. have too much power. I'm not supporting any specific party but I think that we need some differnt view points and some new ideas on how to fix things inside this country and outside. I think that we sould level the playing field a little for all but the Nazi and Comminist parties.

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


If Russia, later the USSR would of had their revolution in the right time place and space then they could have keep up with the US and IMO could have surpassed them for the USSR had WAY more natural resources then the US. Way better possibilities at a higher industrial output. It is funny you all are arguing this even though you all are so wrong it isn't funny.

RIIIIIIGHT. Once again EVERYONE else is wrong and The Boy is right.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife



RIIIIIIGHT. Once again EVERYONE else is wrong and The Boy is right.

Yep finally you get it.

Only took you months but you finally got it on this issue.

Have you all ever questioned the convenient idea that Regan made the USSR fall. Like how can the continuation of past spending make someone fall when they have lived throughout these actions since their existence.

Why haven't you all mentioned the coupe against Gorby, and how that brought Yeltsin into prominence when he stood on the tank? Why haven't you all mention Gorbies perestroika which again tried to russify the satellites? Why haven't you all mentioned the Union treaty which allowed the Satellites to split off of the USSR and have greater control.

Why do you all forget, or ignore what the soviets did to end the USSR, and only say that some man in the US did so, when it doesn't even make sense.

[1stdeadeye]

Facts!

Originally posted by Collegeboy


If Russia, later the USSR would have had their revolution in the right time, place, and space, then they could have keep up with the US and IMO could have surpassed them for the USSR had WAY more natural resources then the US. Way better possibilities at a higher industrial output. It is funny you all are arguing this even though you all are so wrong it isn't funny.

If I was born in England, I'd be British! That is your argument. But they didn't. The Soviet Union was a collossal failure. If failed more then ten years ago and the people of Russia for the most part are still suffering it's after effects.
FACT: USSR Failed
FACT: Soviet Union is now gone
FACT: US is the world's lone superpower
FACT: US won the cold war or the USSR lost, same difference
FACT: CB is desparate!

How could the Soviet Union be brought to their knees by a lack of money in one sector when they had their entire existence that way.

It is perspective fool. In the 30's, Stalin could show footage of Americans in lines at soup kitchens and rail against the evils of capitalism. In the 50's, 60's, and 70's the Soviets controlled all media and inspired fear and distrust of the West. In the 80's, the information age is born. Soviets in larger numbers become discontent as they see how the rest of the Western world is living. The Soviets can't compete with communism. Again I ask you...How are you going to keep them down on the farm once they have seen Paris Comrade.



CB, You must admit that the Soviet Union failed! It no longer exists. It is extinct. The Russian people may be strong, but communism was not as strong as them!

[Collegeboy]

I never said the the USSR was a success, I am in fact saying it was an utter failure.

Note that after Stalin they did not instill fear into the minds of the people about the west.

They could have competed and IMO surpassed if they built the right system in the right area, etc.... And that is why the feel, not because of something Reagon did.

If anyone is interested in exploring this topic the book Lennin's Tomb is a great look into why the Soviet system failed. The book Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Putin is also another good book. And if you read about the soviet system as it was founded and read what they did with what they had, and the hisotry of it in any basic USSR history book you will understand this question better then most people.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
I never said the the USSR was a success, I am in fact saying it was an utter failure.

Really? I think this is a first!

Note that after Stalin they did not instill fear into the minds of the people about the west.

I guess Kruschev saying we will bury the west wasn't about instilling fear. I guess the Cuban Missle Crisis was misunderstanding about firecrackers. I guess the numerous crackdowns and human rights abuses were all in fun.

They could have competed and IMO surpassed if they built the right system in the right area, etc.... And that is why the feel, not because of something Reagon did.

You could shut your trap, but you won't. Coulda, woulda, shoulda....They did not and lost. The US did and won. Spin it anyway you want. You are wrong. You can not argue that the USSR would surpass the US as they did not. The US is here standing strong while the USSR lasted around 80 years. My wife's great grandmother is 99. I guess that makes her tougher then the Soviet Union!

If anyone is interested in exploring this topic the book Lennin's Tomb is a great look into why the Soviet system failed. The book Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Putin is also another good book. And if you read about the soviet system as it was founded and read what they did with what they had, and the hisotry of it in any basic USSR history book you will understand this question better then most people.

Not interested in reading about a failed government and the slow decline of a one time superpower.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
Originally posted by Collegeboy
I never said the the USSR was a success, I am in fact saying it was an utter failure.

Really? I think this is a first!

Note that after Stalin they did not instill fear into the minds of the people about the west.

I guess Kruschev saying we will bury the west wasn't about instilling fear. I guess the numerous crackdowns and human rights abuses were all in fun.

They could have competed and IMO surpassed if they built the right system in the right area, etc.... And that is why the feel, not because of something Reagon did.

You could shut your trap, but you won't. Coulda, Woulda, shoulda....They did not and lost. The US did and won. Spin it anyway you want. You are wrong. You can not argue that the USSR would surpass the US as they did not. The US is here standing strong while the USSR lasted around 80 years. My wife's great grandmother is 99. I guess that makes her tougher then the Soviet Union!

If anyone is interested in exploring this topic the book Lennin's Tomb is a great look into why the Soviet system failed. The book Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Putin is also another good book. And if you read about the soviet system as it was founded and read what they did with what they had, and the hisotry of it in any basic USSR history book you will understand this question better then most people.

Not interested in reading about a failed government and the slow decline of a one time superpower.

A first, my whole argument has been that the Soviet system was a complete failure.

Also how is a leader instilling fear in the west if he is saying we will crush you. Wouldn't this take fear away from the people of your country.

Also you forget Nikitia Sergeevich also loved the US. He is the same guy that said lets put down our deference and stop trying to end each others system and let the best system win. He is also the guy that on a trip to Iowa, was so amazed with corn, that he tried to plant it all over the USSR, it was a failure of course. Nikitia was a loose rocket, one second he is banging his shoe on the table of the UN, the next he is sending JFK a cocker spaniel named Lakia, for Caroline. (Laikia is the name of the first living creature in space) I guess his loose rocket self is why he was kicked out in 1964.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Collegeboy

A first, my whole argument has been that the Soviet system was a complete failure.

Except for their domination of WWII, you know their winning it for the rest of us and all!

Also how is a leader instilling fear in the west if he is saying we will crush you. Wouldn't this take fear away from the people of your country.

All the while preparing his country for war and for US nuclear strikes. I guess that breeds goodwill?

Also you forget Nikitia Sergeevich also loved the US. He is the same guy that said lets put down our deference and stop trying to end each others system and let the best system win. He is also the guy that on a trip to Iowa, was so amazed with corn, that he tried to plant it all over the USSR, it was a failure of course. Nikitia was a loose rocket, one second he is banging his shoe on the table of the UN, the next he is sending JFK a cocker spaniel named Lakia, for Caroline. (Laikia is the name of the first living creature in space) I guess his loose rocket self is why he was kicked out in 1964.

No, I am just disproving what you stated earlier!

[1stdeadeye]

Here!

Originally posted by Collegeboy
Note that after Stalin they did not instill fear into the minds of the people about the west.

This is your exact quote. Nothing added, nothing left out. Not much wiggle room. I proved you wrong! After Stalin, their were still fear-mongers within the USSR.

*Gasp*
You were wrong !

[Collegeboy]

Re: Here!

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye


This is your exact quote. Nothing added, nothing left out. Not much wiggle room. I proved you wrong! After Stalin, their were still fear-mongers within the USSR.

*Gasp*
You were wrong !

How can you instill fear in someone by saying we are going to crush those you are suppose to fear. That doesn't instill any fear, only takes away fear.

[HoppysMag]

Re: Re: Here!

Originally posted by Collegeboy


How can you instill fear in someone by saying we are going to crush those you are suppose to fear. That doesn't instill any fear, only takes away fear.

it doesnt, it replaces fear with blind hatred.

[aaron_mag]

Speaking of propaganda in the cold war does anyone remember the U.S. proganda pieces that used to play between Saturday morning cartoons. One I remember in particular was about a Harmonica player who went across a border and had to suffer the evils of getting the same play as a trombone player even though the market rate for a harmonica player was more in the free market.

Most kids are smarter than adults give them credit for and I remember noting it as a complete propaganda piece. The thing that really amazed me was that they chose a harmonica and a trombone player. Even my kid brain thought this was the most uninteresting and boring propaganda choice ever!:)

Now lets get to CBs argument. Basically he is saying that a Marxist system was never tested as the USSR skipped the industrial phase of the evolution. So really communism has never truly been tested. At one point I too used to subscribe to this theory.

BUT CB you must remember that true capitalism has never been truly been tested as no system truly represent theoritic ideals. Also idealists like to present communism as the system of the common man. Never mind that those who favor that system are usually total elitists who think they know what is best for "the common man". In a capitalist system the common man gets to vote on what resources get used for. If enough of them like WWF wrestling then WWF is on prime time. In the other system elitists get to determine what is best for the people. Hence on PBS (and 1de will like this) there is no WWF, no scantily clad women, and no violent sports. I will not say that I used to be like you but I used to have some of the same beliefs. After listening to my communist professors for a while, however, I realized that most liberal thinkers are not really for the common man. They are for controlling the common man and forcing him to do what is "good" for him. My humble opinion only.