pdf , your statement that in Russia and Germany bast***s come into power is just the consequence of the losing the WW2 by the Germany and Cool war by the USSR.
Certainly i don’t refuse the bolshevik’s and nazi’s evil , but tell honestly : weren’t in USA the racism?
Weren’t there a public executions and killing the afro-americans?
Weren’t a “only for white” singboards?
How many of imperialist war USA had in 20th century…
“Against communism” , “for democraty” now “against the islam” - slogans are different but the the reasons and the resaults are the same - captured the zones of influences and killing the people.
And all is this for what? For money.
I can agree with you what “evil’s countris” were in first half of 20th century, but its quite obviously who play its role today.
In your place i would
Correct. In the US at least, there were evil pricks certainly bent on power that were given a voice after the Great Depression bagan causing civil unrest and massive unemployment. They may well have taken power had FDR not launched the New Deal and the ineffective Hoover or a staunchly-conservative Hoover-like President remained in power.
No idea where you’re getting this from. So far as I’m concerned the evil bas***s mentioned fell from power in 1945 for the Germans and gradually over the period 1953-89 for the Russians. Thankfully, neither country is currently even remotely resembling the situation in the first half of this century. Putin may be autocratic, but that’s a long way from genocidal nutcases like Lenin and Stalin who you once had in power.
Yep. Nowhere near as many as the tens of millions killed as a result of Nazi or Soviet policy though. Over the same time frame, at the very worst the number for the US would be in the tens of thousands.
I think you’re barking up the wrong tree here. The US tends to fight because it believes (rightly or wrongly) it had been attacked by those it was fighting. Hence the number of people in the US believing Saddam launched the 9/11 attacks
Note that the countries I mentioned in the latter half of the 20th century were Uganda, Cambodia and China. Nowhere on earth today (since Rwanda, which was caused by a non-state actor) is that level of killing going on, thankfully.
Come on! Are you serious?
Unfortunately, there is some truth to this. But people are finally waking up here…
You have very tupical western version oh Russian history.
“Bas…s gradually fell from power …over the period 1953-89”.
And then it became the “democraty”, really?
So, now listen the REAL the history. After the 1991 in Russia take the power the real bas…ds (Eltsin’s command) who under the rulling of its western “friends” (mostly from USA) destroed a power state (USSR) and under ruling of bas…ds from IFBB got a tens billions external depts.( Like Eastern Europe states).
And just after the Putin’s coming Russia began (very little while) to defend its own interests(under the shrills of western mass-media about "return to the autocraticy’ - this good sign, its mean we get a right way ).
Yep. Nowhere near as many as the tens of millions killed as a result of Nazi or Soviet policy though. Over the same time frame, at the very worst the number for the US would be in the tens of thousands.
tens millions killed? Don’t you forget it was a WW2 ( which in eastern front was a much worst then in western).
Or may be do you mean the billshit about “20 millions in GULAG” and “6 million of jews” 
You may say what you want , but don’t try please to teach me of my history 
… The US tends to fight because it believes (rightly or wrongly) it had been attacked by those it was fighting. Hence the number of people in the US believing Saddam launched the 9/11 attacks
They can believes in any shit which want, this is theirs personal problems.
But if looked to the resault : 2 million killed in Vietnam, about 1,5 in Korea.
Camboja, Laos, Panama, Timor, Ugoslavia ,Afganistan, now the Iraq.
As you may be know ( watch the “Farengate 911” ) the most of the terrorist of 9/11 were from the Saudy Aravia. But Americans blamed the Iraq and Afganistan. Nice politic (Thank’s for the god, not the Belorussia)
Note that the countries I mentioned in the latter half of the 20th century were Uganda, Cambodia and China. Nowhere on earth today (since Rwanda, which was caused by a non-state actor) is that level of killing going on, thankfully.
Communist-evil China , pdf , with its great economic rose (about 11-12 per year) could easy (through 10 -15 years) overturn the American gegemony in the Asia and possibly in the World.
So we better look who will get a name as the “bas…ds”
Cheers.
Somebody needs too. I doubt the US “destroyed” the Soviet Union, I think the CP did a pretty good job on their own…
They can believes in any shit which want, this is theirs personal problems.
But if looked to the resault : 2 million killed in Vietnam, about 1,5 in Korea.
Camboja, Laos, Panama, Timor, Ugoslavia ,Afganistan, now the Iraq.
As you may be know ( watch the “Farengate 911” ) the most of the terrorist of 9/11 were from the Saudy Aravia. But Americans blamed the Iraq and Afganistan. Nice politic
It’s true most of the terrorists were Saudis, and the invasion of Iraq has turned to a huge foreign policy abortion for the US and never should have happened. But the attacks were likely planned in Afghanistan at the behest of the Taliban. The volunteers were mostly Saudi, but most had spent time in Afghanistan. The US was right to destroy the Taliban. And the United States started none of the other Wars you listed, other than Panama; and Noriega was a prick in his own right. It’s one thing to condemn the United States, but those other states aren’t exactly innocent little utopias of peace and joy. The US mostly became involved in those conflicts and as I recall, in each case, the other side was just as responsible for many of those deaths as the US was.
And BTW, since you mentioned “F911” (a film I agree with BTW), have you seen the film on the Belsan School Raid: “Three Days In September”? It’s rather critical of Putin’s handling of the crisis and his subsequent suppression of any independent inquiry into the events surrounding the debacle.
Communist-evil China , pdf , with its great economic rose (about 11-12 per year) could easy (through 10 -15 years) overturn the American gegemony in the Asia and possibly in the World.
So we better look who will get a name as the “bas…ds”
Cheers.
China may indeed turn over American hegemony. Their economy is a response of their autocratic gov’t liberalizing economically, but not politically or socially. So I wouldn’t be so happy about it if I were you. When have Russians and Chinese ever got along? And you can say what you want about the United States, but our policies could be a lot worse towards other nations. I think we buy a lot of your oil and what consumer goods Russia offers.
And there may come a day when you yearn for the old days of American hegemony–because there are alternatives that are far worse…
…and fall asleep again soon after the next elections.
Nick , we are all too good know the mass-media technologies to direct of social opinion to the “right side”.
Or may be you think that americans war corporation (and companies like sadly known Halliberton) will want to refuse of billions contracts in Iraq’s war supplies.
You can play in “democraty” of the “freedom of selection” as much as you wish. But USA NEVER will return back the troops from the Iraq.
Not becouse “somebody sleep” but because American rule elite never will do it.
Political resaults of it could be a catastrophic for the US positions and it immediately feel the Israel.
I hope you don’t wish to offend the jews, Nick.
Therefore American guys ( and Britain and ets) will continue to die for the jewish politic in the Near East.
Nobody’s asleep here. It’s actually one of the most divisive times in American history actually. Well, some are asleep, but that’s everywhere.
Nick , we are all too good know the mass-media technologies to direct of social opinion to the “right side”.
LMAFO!!:lol: Oh Chevan, if you only heard the relentless complaining form the “right side” regarding “liberal” (left side) media bias in the US!
Or may be you think that americans war corporation (and companies like sadly known Halliberton) will want to refuse of billions contracts in Iraq’s war supplies.
I’m well aware of the corrupt cronyism in my gov’t. But things like this will be changing shortly.
You can play in “democraty” of the “freedom of selection” as much as you wish. But USA NEVER will return back the troops from the Iraq.
Not becouse “somebody sleep” but because American rule elite never will do it.
When did I ever say “democracy” or “freedom,” in fact I think that argument is utter shit.
Political resaults of it could be a catastrophic for the US positions and it immediately feel the Israel.
I hope you don’t wish to offend the jews, Nick.
Therefore American guys ( and Britain and ets) will continue to die for the jewish politic in the Near East.
LOL We’re not dying for “Jewish politics.” Certainly, many Neoconservatives like Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld have cited Saddam’s support of terror against Israel as a reason to topple Saddam. These are the same Neoconservatives that used to exaggerate Soviet military power BTW, in order to justify massive spending on new military tech. and to try to unify the American people through fear by using some of the same (boogyman/“Snowball”) techniques that Communists did (actually, a lot of Neoconservatives were themselves Marxists or Maoists while in college during the 1960s believe it or not, so they share the same stilted ideology over reality world view sadly). So, yes there is an “Israeli Lobby” in the US that will attack any politician that speaks out against Israel’s immoral policies that are tantamount to Apartheid. But Israel has overplayed its hand these days. People are now questioning why we’re giving them billion$ a year, only to have them increase the risk of terrorism for the US and arrogantly attack other nations like Lebanon, decrying the killing of 60-or-70 Israeli civilians by Hezbollah rockets, while killing over 1000 Lebanese in what amounts to thinly veiled collective punishment.
We invaded Iraq mainly for the oil. Not to save Jews from destruction from Iraq/Iran/Syria/Hezbollah (which is a pretty laughable assertion since no one can challenge Israel militarily with her 200 nuclear weapons, unless Israel stupidly attacks fortified positions head on). And if you remember, Saddam tried to kill Bush’s daddy, ex-Pres. George HW Bush. So there are many reasons there.
And if you think that American soldiers won’t be withdrawn, you are both right and wrong. They will eventually be redeployed to friendly Kurdistan. And the Sunnis that fought them can build their country with no oil, and the Shias can build their Iranian-backed Theocracy. And Iraq will no longer exist…
Not US destroed the SU Nick , just our own the “bas…ds” according the CIA recomendations and some “experts” (like the main american rusofob Zbignev Bzezinckij )
It’s true most of the terrorists were Saudis, and the invasion of Iraq has turned to a huge foreign policy abortion for the US and never should have happened. But the attacks were likely planned in Afghanistan at the behest of the Taliban. The volunteers were mostly Saudi, but most had spent time in Afghanistan. The US was right to destroy the Taliban. And the United States started none of the other Wars you listed, other than Panama; and Noriega was a prick in his own right. It’s one thing to condemn the United States, but those other states aren’t exactly innocent little utopias of peace and joy. The US mostly became involved in those conflicts and as I recall, in each case, the other side was just as responsible for many of those deaths as the US was.
No one doubt in American right to destroy the Taliban, but capturing the Iraq is another the story …
but those other states aren’t exactly innocent little utopias of peace and joy
So Nick lets install the American “standarts of democraty” by bombing and tanks. This “other states” hasn’t right to choose its fate and style of life??
And BTW, since you mentioned “F911” (a film I agree with BTW), have you seen the film on the Belsan School Raid: “Three Days In September”? It’s rather critical of Putin’s handling of the crisis and his subsequent suppression of any independent inquiry into the events surrounding the debacle.
I didn’t see this film, but necessary will watch as soon as i could it get.
I excellent know the western critic of Putin.
I’m not delight from him, but he is the first Russian president who try to do something for the country.
China may indeed turn over American hegemony. Their economy is a response of their autocratic gov’t liberalizing economically, but not politically or socially. So I wouldn’t be so happy about it if I were you.
I’m not happy Nick, i know the threat of China, inspite of today officially our both states have a excellent partnerships.
But honestly speaking ,“autocratic China” don’t creat the enemy banan states (sponsored by CIA or Jorge Souros fund) in the russian border(Gorgia) .
I know just one thing , we must to create the power( and meanly effective) army and newest wearpon ( including nuclear:for our China-"friendship " will became more strong) .And we haven’t much time for this.
This not mean the new Race of weaponry , of couse and we need to interact with NATO but don’t forget about national interests.
When have Russians and Chinese ever got along? And you can say what you want about the United States, but our policies could be a lot worse towards other nations. I think we buy a lot of your oil and what consumer goods Russia offers.
Your policies could be a lot worse towards other nations, becouse Russia not enemy for the USA, but its not mean thet we cuoldn’t to defends our interests. Or the interests of our brother-nation like Belorussians and Ukrainians.
And there may come a day when you yearn for the old days of American hegemony–because there are alternatives that are far worse…
You right Nick much more ever you though - manys russians already yearn for the old days of USSR
I’m not actually too bothered what it became. Kruschev didn’t kill anywhere near as many who disagreed with him for whatever reason as Stalin or Lenin did. Gorbachev didn’t kill as many as Kruschev. So far as I can tell, Gorbachev, Yeltsin and Putin are/were all behaving reasonably well by historical standards (not up to what I would expect of a western country, but Russia doesn’t yet have the institutions and public mindset that would allow it that luxury).
I believe the western media also disliked Idi Amin and Pol Pot. Just because they dislike you does not mean that they are wrong.
The main objection I have to Putin is that he is being inconsistent. I have no objection to him prosecuting the various oligarchs (who would have been described as robber-barons in an earlier age, by and large). However, what I do object to is the way that various oligarchs get away with it until they offend the Kremlin. That’s a really bad foundation to build a state on.
In the Soviet list I’m including all those killed for example by famine when the Kulaks were liquidated (thus removing a major part of the agricultural economy - with nothing yet in place to replace the food they generated), those sent to the Gulags who died there, those who died in Stalin’s purges, those killed when for example the Soviets suppressed the Hungarian uprising, etc. My best estimate is that between 1917 and 1989, the total number of dead will exceed 10 million by a substantial margin.
For the Nazi list, I’m including all the dead in Europe from WW2 (which was after all started by the Nazis - so for instance the 4 million or so Soviet PoWs they deliberately starved to death count here, as do the Soviet troops killed in action and the German civillians killed in bombing raids), the Jews, Gypsies, etc. killed in the Holocaust (and yes I do think that number was of the order of 6 million). The total number here is of the order of 50 million or so.
Not during the cultural revolution, which is when I consider the evil types really were running the place. Then tens of millions died from starvation and other reasons, the economy was nearly destroyed, etc. All in the name of “ideological purity”.
While I have issues with the current Chinese government (e.g. indiscriminate use of the death penalty), they are not what I would describe as evil.
So why another countries must feel on itself’s skin the american “divisive times” , Nick? May be another peoples are asleep too, but nobody try to be “world policeman” exept the USA.
LMAFO!!:lol: Oh Chevan, if you only heard the relentless complaining form the “right side” regarding “liberal” (left side) media bias in the US!
I know, therefore “right side” is the (right side) today.And no left side could change the situation.
We invaded Iraq mainly for the oil. Not to save Jews from destruction from Iraq/Iran/Syria/Hezbollah (which is a pretty laughable assertion since no one can challenge Israel militarily with her 200 nuclear weapons, unless Israel stupidly attacks fortified positions head on). And if you remember, Saddam tried to kill Bush’s daddy, ex-Pres. George HW Bush. So there are many reasons there.
So do you undestand what you talk about. It’s mean that USA get a IMPERIALIST war in Iraq for the OIL. This is very serious accusation for US gov.
All of your called reasons is just personal US reasons and its mean that “official” version of invasion of Iraq:“weapon of mass-destruction” and the “liberation” of of Iraq - are just political lie, which were nessesary to justify the agression. And tens thousand victims of Iraq population were the resault of fight for the oil. ???
My congratulations , Nick , you live in new “Empire of Evil” …
And if you think that American soldiers won’t be withdrawn, you are both right and wrong. They will eventually be redeployed to friendly Kurdistan. And the Sunnis that fought them can build their country with no oil, and the Shias can build their Iranian-backed Theocracy. And Iraq will no longer exist…
Yea , now thank’s for the USA , Iraq will no longer exist, but it by strange way it existed befor the invasion.
That’s what really importaint pdf, you don’t try to compare and think.Just common mass-media oppinion …
Kruschev didn’t kill anywhere near as many who disagreed with him for whatever reason as Stalin or Lenin did. Gorbachev didn’t kill as many as Kruschev. So far as I can tell, Gorbachev, Yeltsin and Putin are/were all behaving reasonably well by historical standards
It’s wrong conclusion, becouse each state leader responsible for all country , not just secret police and army.
Yeltsin are guilty in destraction of state, appearing war conflicts (so called “hot points”) in territory of USSR - about 300 000 peoples since 1992-1998 + victims of criminal illegality (political murders, mafia and ets) about 1 000 000 (!!!) victims + Chechen war about 300 000 civilians + sharp worsening in living conditions and as consequence is the increased level of deads (in comparison with THE USSR) About 5 millions since 1992 = 6.5 millions deads on “Yeltsin company” and as the evident resault the decreasing of Russian population to 6-8 millions during 1992-1998.
Gorbachev began this “nightmare”. Together with Yeltsin both are guilty in criminal “henocide” of 1990 -yy.
In comparision with Yeltsin, Stalin look like a kid, and Krushev -like a “holy” almost.
Even during worst times of Linin and bloody bolsheviks in 1917-1923 was the simular the situation.
(not up to what I would expect of a western country, but Russia doesn’t yet have the institutions and public mindset that would allow it that luxury).
Now all of russian understand that a building the “freedom society” is the resault of hard and long time work, not the stupid listening of western’s bas…rd recomendations. We get a go to the right way without a such “friends”
I believe the western media also disliked Idi Amin and Pol Pot. Just because they dislike you does not mean that they are wrong.
Agree, just because Putin dislike them that’s don’t mean they are right.
The main objection I have to Putin is that he is being inconsistent. I have no objection to him prosecuting the various oligarchs (who would have been described as robber-barons in an earlier age, by and large). However, what I do object to is the way that various oligarchs get away with it until they offend the Kremlin. That’s a really bad foundation to build a state on.
I told already , i am not delight from Putin. And i agree that he is being inconsistent.
While one oligarh (Hodorcovskij) go to the prison , Putin kiss to the ass the another oligarh Abramovich.
All this ba…ds are the real robber-barons. In 1994-1998 when “Yeltsin command” ( or the “family”) made its dirty bisiness , those f…nk oligarhs rob the state. The simple fact they they were survived and got a billions don’t mean they could live in honor. Almost all from them are the criminals.
Putin justice - is a the chosen justice, but this is better than the full absence of the justice during Yeltsin’s period.
Guys, Ive split this off from the original topic. Enjoy your debate and play nice!
We are plaing enough nice
Firefly , when did you get the idea to name this thread as “Comunist V Capitalist”?
Who is comunist , me??
Not so a long time ago Nickdfresh called me as Nazi
And some members like to repeat about my tend to the “David Irving and Ko”.
I just talk about peoples life in USSR, but this is absolutly don’t mean i supported the ComParty.
My point is the bad idea to made a responsible for all evil in history just Nazi and Communists.
Cheers, my capalists comrades
Ummm… only partially. While Yeltsin cocked up some things royally (e.g. first Chechen war) and is clearly at fault for them, other things are the result of long term historical trends that long predate his accession to power (indeed his birth). I personally think that the economic problems faced by both him and Gorbachev substantially predate their birth, and are in fact based on flawed Marxian theory. Because the Soviets were saddled with an economic theory that simply didn’t work (i.e. a command economy - effectively where a central authority tells people what to produce, rather than a market) they could never compete economically with the capitalist societies they saw as enemies. When Gorbachev initiated Glasnost, the system ceased to cover up it’s failings and instead started to disintegrate. IMHO the previous ability to cover up economic failings (with for instance staged displays of military might in Red Square, the space race, etc.) was one of the vital props keeping the Soviet Union together. When that fell apart, the whole edifice came down. Gorbachev started it without realising what he was doing, and Yeltsin finished the task with a display of incompetence and corruption.
The population crash is another instance of ongoing trends being made worse by a reduction in the power of the state. What details I have seen suggest that alcohol abuse was common in the USSR prior to the fall of communism, and the relaxation of border controls with the fall of communism has meant that this has morphed into a combined drug and alcohol problem (some accounts also suggest that the Heroin problem was to a large extent brought back by veterans of Afghanistan - very much a Soviet war). This is IMHO one of the major reasons for the population crash. Another is the decline in religious belief and the increase in abortions - largely due to the suppression of the Orthodox church by the Bolsheviks.
Maybe, maybe not. The problem the west has is that we’ve seen demagogues who go out of their way to subvert the democratic process and destroy freedoms before (the various 20th century fascists are prime examples). For whatever reasons (and they may be very good reasons) Putin is using many of the same tactics - muzzling the press to an extent, politically inspired trials of those who oppose him, wars to distract the attention of the populace onto an external threat, etc. This combined with the fact that Russia is a potentially hostile power right on the edge of Europe makes us nervous.
Concur.
Ummm… maybe, a lot depends on what he does with it. Successfully subverting the justice system leaves him in an extremely powerful position, somewhat similar to the old Soviet system. Whether or not he then subverts the system depends on if he is honest and if he has the best interests of the people at heart. This may work out fine, but what if his successor doesn’t? This is why the west as a whole has adopted the concept that the guilt of anyone must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, before a jury of their peers (i.e. those like them), and that it is better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent man goes to prison. Again, when we see people doing this it makes us very nervous.
Oh, and sorry for splitting the posts up. For some reason my PC has issues with long posts on this type of board software.
Almost all of the posts are related to the Soviet Union times, so almost all of the posts surely relate to Communism?
agree, but those proceses as :distruction of USSR and as the resault all other the reasons this is doing of Gorbachev and Yeltsin. Both weren’t stupid leaders and they must be calculated the worst resaults of downfall of USSR.
. I personally think that the economic problems faced by both him and Gorbachev substantially predate their birth, and are in fact based on flawed Marxian theory.
indeed Maxial theory was rejected to the “dump of the history” in 1985 after Gorbachev came to the power. He tryed to create the new economic using the marcet principles and private capital ( so caller cooperatives). And it instantly had the good resault in 1987-89
Because the Soviets were saddled with an economic theory that simply didn’t work (i.e. a command economy - effectively where a central authority tells people what to produce, rather than a market) they could never compete economically with the capitalist societies they saw as enemies.
I well know about deficiencies in the command (planned) system. But don’t forgot about China, where as and in USSR firstly was applied the market principles ( but instead of SU China was able to saved the state).
And as you know the China’s command economic in till 1985 was copy of USSR planned economic.
Today using the market mechanisms and power state controled economic ( tupical for the command system) China was able to archieve the great increase 11-12 % per year for a long time (already 10 years) this is absolutly unpossible for the purely market-liberal economic with its lifts and decreases)
When Gorbachev initiated Glasnost, the system ceased to cover up it’s failings and instead started to disintegrate. IMHO the previous ability to cover up economic failings (with for instance staged displays of military might in Red Square, the space race, etc.) was one of the vital props keeping the Soviet Union together. When that fell apart, the whole edifice came down.
Im sure the “whole edifice” would be never “came down” without active help and destructing role of some evil persons.
Gorbachev started it without realising what he was doing, and Yeltsin finished the task with a display of incompetence and corruption.
absolutly agree, Gorbachev didn’t realise what he was doing, but as leader of state he had a responsible for this.
The population crash is another instance of ongoing trends being made worse by a reduction in the power of the state.
What details I have seen suggest that alcohol abuse was common in the USSR prior to the fall of communism,
This is tupical the error. According the resault of the interrogations: medium russians drunk less then as example germans or the finns.
and the relaxation of border controls with the fall of communism has meant that this has morphed into a combined drug and alcohol problem (some accounts also suggest that the Heroin problem was to a large extent brought back by veterans of Afghanistan - very much a Soviet war). This is IMHO one of the major reasons for the population crash.
According the cosial tests the main reason of decreasing the population is the increased dead’s level mainly because of high costs and inaccessibility of qualitative medical-services and reduction in the birth rate because of the high costs of life (mostly education and ets).
As you know in USSR the all kind of education was the free.
Another is the decline in religious belief and the increase in abortions - largely due to the suppression of the Orthodox church by the Bolsheviks.
Not correct, comunists tryed to increase the population by all the methods.
Medium soviet family had 3 children in 1960-1970 and 2 in 1970-1985 , but today this became the unpossible for the most family in russia.
The icrease of the aborts level is the resault of the high cost of living and absence of sexual-culture (deficiency in secondary education). In this parameters USSR education was much better.
Cheers