Soviet Union: Good thing or Bad thing?

[Pangur Bán]

The reason I'm opening this thread is because the Soviet Union seems to have become fashionable in Europe, loads of young people wearing T-shirts with "CCCP" or the "USSR" printed on the front.

The beginning of the Soviet Union promised a world communist state and every poor person in the world was filled with hope. After a while, it began to lose track of it's original revolutionary aims and they ended up with Stalin as leader, with all the nasty things that this man was responsible for. But he did manage to defeat the Nazis, which was possibly a greater evil to the world.
And the Soviet Union managed to keep America in check for decades, preventing it from nuking every country it felt like. And it provided opposition to America's form of capitalism in the 3rd world. Now that it has gone, America is free to do what it wants.

But maybe this is a good thing.

 

[Paradõsis]

I'm no great lover of capitalism (which plays on human greed), but I don't think communism will ever work either (since it tries to ignore that many humans will take advantage of the system). Given a choice between things, I'd take Republicanism or Monarchy over Communism, not because of the stated goals, but because of the likely outcomes. I also have a bad association with the governments of the 20th century in Russia (I'm part of a Church that had countless people martyred by Stalin, Lenin, et al.) I don't think the Soviet Union (late in the 20th century) was as bad as American rhetoric made it out to be, but I don't think it was a good system either.

 

[ComradeDavo]

As a communist myself I always find it difficult to make judgements on the USSR. I mean I share common goals with it........but then I really disagree with it's imperialistic ways and the way it's leaders abused power and discriminated against oppenents.

edit: my vote was that 'It was equally good and bad'

 

[Damien]

It was a bad thing.C what people think about communism now!
If USSR would have applied a democratic system(based on the swiss system),the entire world would be communist nowadays.

 

[ComradeDavo]

It was a bad thing.C what people think about communism now!

yeah, it is true that most people only ever think of the USSR when communism is mentioned, damn annoying for me I tell ya!

 

[Vrylakas]

ComradeDavo wrote:

yeah, it is true that most people only ever think of the USSR when communism is mentioned, damn annoying for me I tell ya!

The USSR was the first state to successfully declare itself a communist dictatorship, CD, and it set the standard for all other communist states that followed in the 20th century.

To really answer the question I'd need to ask a few of my own questions first:

1. Good/bad for whom? Some did profit and benefit from the USSR - although most of us didn't.

2. Short-term or long-term?

3. "Good" in the positive sense, or in the "well, it could have been worse" sense? If the USSR hadn't invaded Eastern Europe in 1944-45 and ousted the Germans, life probably would have been far worse for Eastern Europeans than it turned out to be under Soviet imperial occupation. I suppose that counts as a consolation...

 

[The Art of War]

Originally posted by calgacus
And the Soviet Union managed to keep America in check for decades, preventing it from nuking every country it felt like.

Yeah, since the USSR has been gone, we sure have used those nukes, haven't we?

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by The Art of War



Yeah, since the USSR has been gone, we sure have used those nukes, haven't we?

The Russians still have nukes, so do the Chinese, French, English, Indians, Pakistanis, Israelis, and pos. N.Koreans. If you want to be that simplistic then look at the fact that, when America had nukes and no one else did, they nuked Japan twice, but they have never used them since Stalin acquired them for the USSR.

 

[Citizen_K]

Wow.

I can't believe someone (above^) actually said "well, Stalin wasn''t really as bad as Hitler." Of course he was. He killed far more than many people are willing to admit. He killed his own military officers. He was also (along with Hitler) responsible for the deaths of thousands of Jews and their expulsion from Russia, which killed hundreds more. (Fiddler on the Roof, anyone?) I suppose you'll tell me now that Mao didn't in fact kill millions of his own people either under a supposed agricultural reform in the name of Communism and the advancing perfection of humanity? They're both related, and if you like what the Soviet Republics did, you're bound to like what the People's Republic did.

I guess you can chalk it up to Clueless Europeans to reason that "at least Russian expansionism kept the Evil Imperialist Americans from usurping the Third World with their Capitalist-Slave-Labor Filth!" Sometimes I think that the Cold War brought out the worst in America, and without it the world would be a much more peaceful place. Maybe everybody would like America more, for example--the Middle East, instead of xenophobic europeans trashing us for having a system slightly more capitalistic than theirs. "I am America, destroyer of cultures."

I guess if you were alive in the 80's you would have overthrown your governments for the U.S.S.R. in order to get away from the greedy conniving Yankee Pig-Dogs? Because the way you pointed it out, Russia has always been the lesser of two evils.

I'm beginning to think that a lot of Europeans are out of touch with reality, or its history thereof...

 

[Xiahou-Dun]

Originally posted by calgacus


The Russians still have nukes, so do the Chinese, French, English, Indians, Pakistanis, Israelis, and pos. N.Koreans. If you want to be that simplistic then look at the fact that, when America had nukes and no one else did, they nuked Japan twice, but they have never used them since Stalin acquired them for the USSR.

What year did the USSR get Nukes? Answer this and then explain why the US didn't go on a nuke spree. You might want to think the US would, but the facts prove they did not while they had the chance to.



Now since this was discussed back when I was in school (13 years ago) I will give you the "suppose" reason why they didn't.

The Soviet Army. LMAO

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by Xiahou-Dun
What year did the USSR get Nukes? Answer this and then explain why the US didn't go on a nuke spree. You might want to think the US would, but the facts prove they did not while they had the chance to.



Now since this was discussed back when I was in school (13 years ago) I will give you the "suppose" reason why they didn't.

The Soviet Army. LMAO

The Soviet Union detonated its first nuclear weapon in 1949. Thus, the Americans had 4 years. The Korean War started in 1950, so the 1st opportunity after ww2 came too late.

The US did go on a nuke "spree" when it had the "opportunity" - in Japan.

Anyway, I didn't originally say that it was the USSR's nuclear capabilities that prevent America using nukes.

Geez...why are people so hyper-sensitive?!

 

[CrazyDuck]

the soviets got nukes in 1949

the usa never had a reason to nuke anyone after nuking Japan except from the USSR and that option went out of the window when they developed nukes

 

[Switch625]

Originally posted by calgacus


The Soviet Union detonated its first nuclear weapon in 1949. Thus, the Americans had 4 years. The Korean War started in 1950, so the 1st opportunity after ww2 came too late.

The US did go on a nuke "spree" when it had the "opportunity" - in Japan.

Anyway, I didn't originally say that it was the USSR's nuclear capabilities that prevent America using nukes.

Geez...why are people so hyper-sensitive?!

People get hyper-sensitive when they see someone make a non-thought-out comment like "The US did go on a nuke "spree" when it had the "opportunity" - in Japan." If we had gone on a "nuke spree," we'd have been cheered on by the likes of Korea, China, Phillipines, Vietnam, and others in Asia who suffered horrors during the Japanese conquest and occupation.

Frankly, it is a supreme effort for me to keep from flaming you. If can you imagine that the United States would freely toss around nuclear weapons just for the hell of it, you have ABSOLUTELY NO ******* CLUE what we are like.

Hmm. That was a flame, wasn't it? Looks like I lost my self control. [sarcasm]Somebody get me a nuke, I have some Iraqis I want to irradiate![/sarcasm]

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by Switch625


People get hyper-sensitive when they see someone make a non-thought-out comment like "The US did go on a nuke "spree" when it had the "opportunity" - in Japan." If we had gone on a "nuke spree," we'd have been cheered on by the likes of Korea, China, Phillipines, Vietnam, and others in Asia who suffered horrors during the Japanese conquest and occupation.

Frankly, it is a supreme effort for me to keep from flaming you. If can you imagine that the United States would freely toss around nuclear weapons just for the hell of it, you have ABSOLUTELY NO ******* CLUE what we are like.

Hmm. That was a flame, wasn't it? Looks like I lost my self control. [sarcasm]Somebody get me a nuke, I have some Iraqis I want to irradiate![/sarcasm]

make sure you don't forget the Cubans and the people from Pakganistan

 

[The Art of War]

Originally posted by calgacus

The US did go on a nuke "spree" when it had the "opportunity" - in Japan.

Anyway, I didn't originally say that it was the USSR's nuclear capabilities that prevent America using nukes.

Geez...why are people so hyper-sensitive?!

I always thought a nuke spree was hundreds of nukes. Not 2, even though I know the damage they caused.

We, well I, am not "hyper-sensitive," I just was saying that, even if the USSR hadn't kept us Americans "in check" we wouldn't have nuked everyone anyway. Contrary to what you might think, we do have common sense...

 

[Fez_Monk]

''The Marxists maintain that only a dictatorship--their dictatorship of course--can create the will of the people, while our answer to this is: No dictatorship can have any other aim but that of self perpetuation, and it can beget only slavery in the people tolerating it" - Mikhail Bakunin

State Communism always has, and always will end up being a state of oppression.

 

[Noble_Sniper]

People are getting "hyper-sensitive" because you are putting down the United States and right now there is a huge amount of national pride around here in the United States so if you don't want people to get "hyper-sensitive" than don't put down the United States. That is all.

 

[Xiahou-Dun]

Originally posted by Switch625


People get hyper-sensitive when they see someone make a non-thought-out comment like "The US did go on a nuke "spree" when it had the "opportunity" - in Japan."

Well this part didn't bother me. I was just wondering why the US didn't for 4 YEARS go on a Nuke spree (While no other country had any). Kind of blows the "And the Soviet Union managed to keep America in check for decades, preventing it from nuking every country it felt like." theory out of the water.



What I really like is how almost every topic made about the USSR has to have something about the bad USA. I guess this comes from being the Winner and not having a Siberia.

 

[sgrig]

Originally posted by Xiahou-Dun
Well this part didn't bother me. I was just wondering why the US didn't for 4 YEARS go on a Nuke spree (While no other country had any). Kind of blows the "And the Soviet Union managed to keep America in check for decades, preventing it from nuking every country it felt like." theory out of the water.



What I really like is how almost every topic made about the USSR has to have something about the bad USA. I guess this comes from being the Winner and not having a Siberia.

Apparently after WW2, the US did have plans to begin nuclear war against Soviet Union in 1950, but had to abandon their plans when USSR got the bomb. [note I don't have any links to confirm this, but this is something I read a while ago]

You see, it takes time to build up an arsenal and make large amounts of nuclear warheads combat-ready.

 

[Xiahou-Dun]

Originally posted by sgrig


Apparently after WW2, the US did have plans to begin nuclear war against Soviet Union in 1950, but had to abandon their plans when USSR got the bomb. [note I don't have any links to confirm this, but this is something I read a while ago]

You see, it takes time to build up an arsenal and make large amounts of nuclear warheads combat-ready.

I read once that the moon was made of cheese [Note I don't have any links to back it up] (See anything here)



So you want me to believe was the USSR got one Nuke and the US decides to call off the "attack". Why do I say one? Because you just said it takes time to get nukes ready. If I was going to nuke someone, I wouldn't wait till they had 50 and you can bet if the US was planning it they wouldn't either. 4 years of building nukes and then decide after the USSR tested one nuke (not a ICBM at that) to not go ahead with the attack. Well I guess this then proves the US is not on a "spree"