Hard Facts about Communism/USSR.

Other Wars Cold War
#81

NATO had no “first strike” doctrine (unlike the Soviets…),

Sorry for my indecorous interference, honorable Mr. Man of Stoat, but that famous first strike solution actually appeared in the official US Governmental plans for the nuclear war, namely within the so called Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP), one among the most sensitive US governmental secrets. However, due to inexorable rules of the Freedom of Information Act, certain materials have been recently declassified and highly intriguing details about plans for the making of U.S. nuclear war are nowadays completely available. So here they are:

SIOP – 63 I

The most intriguing part of this highly attention-grabbing document is part called “The availability of options for preemptive or retaliatory strikes against Soviet and Chinese targets.”

SIOP – 63 II

Until very recently, the complete story was almost absolutely unknown – however, it is a completely proven one.

Original document, downloadable in the PDF format, is located here:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb236/index.htm

I hope that you will enjoy in this truly rare example of highly confidential, but nowadays declassified written historiographic source, honorable ladies and gentlemen!

Tanks right next to each other with a handful of infantry running behind. Looks great, but there is no way you would do that in reality.

Then why on Earth these Swedish troopers are exercising in a completely similar manner – furthermore, Swedish infanterists are positioned in front of those legendary S-tanks and Pbv 302 APCs, which are rolling and firing straight to the fore!

Strange implementation pattern of the Swedish infantry during the regular army maneuvers, vicinity of Trollhättan, 1984.

And as far as I remember, I have some strange snapshot about Canadian maneuvers from 1983 – but where to hell are they… I’ll have to make some surveillance toward those peculiar pieces!:roll:

In the meantime, honorable ladies and gentlemen – all the best! :slight_smile:

#82

I suspect there may be some disagreement over the meaning of the word “fair”. The Soviets tended to practice equality of outcome - i.e. pretty much no matter what you did your living standards were the same. The West tends to aspire to equality of opportunity - everyone can rise to the limits of their ability, and be rewarded accordingly. I regard the latter as preferable, not least because it provides a direct reward for working hard. One of the major problems with the Soviet system is that it fails to provide workers with a sufficient incentive to work hard.

Looks good for the cameras? As a general rule anything that looks good for the cameras will also look good to an artillery FOO (forward observation officer) or through a gunsight.

#83

This was a BRILLIANT dear mst Labrarian.
As always… you really could wonder all of us every time.:slight_smile:
So much rare documents and photos- it seems you have realised the entire littler historical research.
I am in delight that so higly widely educated and cultural person could so brightly express the point and tell us about things that today the manies try to falsify.
All the best.

#84

Wrong .
Indeed in the USSR were aimed to guaranty the equal social rights for all peoples.
There were a lot of stimuluss to work better.
Also there were the special socialists competitions- where the winner got the different awards ( including the money).This system brilliantly work in industry ( especially in military field), it wasn’t so effective in agricalture ( coz in reason expressed above).
The soviet science was also rather effective and could compensate the western one that had a giant investitions ( for instanse the whole soviet space program was cost just 5-10% or american - with the equal or in some fields even better resuaults).
Besides the social guaranties of FREE hight education and medical service was very importaint.
Sure the USSR had no such bright symbols of Super-Rich life, but there were never been the Homeless.
And there had no work ONLY one who did not wish to work.
Just one bright example - the both the Yeltsyn and Gorbachev were the sons of simple workers or peasants.
How many peoples in British parliament and govenments today has the simple lineage;)?

#85

There was a case of one peasant who had worked particularly hard on a collective farm who was awarded a medal. At the presentation ceremony, he asked “couldn’t I have a sack of potatoes instead?” This comment was enough to land him in gulag.

Medals are no good to starving people.

#86

Equal “social rights”? Are you kidding? Party shops, preferential treatment for party members (both high and low), forced Russification of the ethnic minorities, and persecution of anybody even suspected of harbouring noncommunist sympathies or praising anything about the West.

The Soviet space program used slave labour and have appalling quality control and safety standards. No wonder it cost less.

No homeless? That’s an easy one – vagrants were picked up and charged, and ended up in the gulag as common criminals. There was an incredible housing shortage, with long waiting lists to get an apartment, the vast majority of people living in shared apartments. Although if you were a party member you went to the top of the list.

Material rewards were dependent on political activity, rather than working hard.

Stop trying to defend the indefensible.

#87

As exemplified by the brilliant Lada Niva the USSR exported to Australia? The 4WD for people who didn’t want to go anywhere, because they couldn’t.

Besides the social guaranties of FREE hight education and medical service was very importaint.

So there weren’t special educational privileges for children of party officials, according to their parents’ rank?

Sure the USSR had no such bright symbols of Super-Rich life …

So everybody had dachas, just like the senior party officials?

The nomenklatura didn’t matter, didn’t even exist?

Just one bright example - the both the Yeltsyn and Gorbachev were the sons of simple workers or peasants.
How many peoples in British parliament and govenments today has the simple lineage;)?

Being simple is no obstacle to advancement in the West. Just look at George Bush. :smiley:

#88

This is enough to conclude you know noting about that matter MoS.
The “appalling Safaty standards” of Soviet spacecraft cost LESS lives for the soviet spacemans that for AMERICAN ONES;)

No homeless? That’s an easy one – vagrants were picked up and charged, and ended up in the gulag as common criminals. There was an incredible housing shortage, with long waiting lists to get an apartment, the vast majority of people living in shared apartments. Although if you were a party member you went to the top of the list.

You mean FREE APARTMENTS that was buildd by the state - yes you right it was enough long list.
However NOBODY forbided to buy the house for you money. As my perents made 35 years ago.
And…YOU DO not need to be a communist member to get the apartments;)

Material rewards were dependent on political activity, rather than working hard.

Who did say this buls… for you?

Stop trying to defend the indefensible.

:slight_smile:
As doctor Goebbels told - then more insolent lie- then faster people believe in it.

#89

Pull the other one, you pernicious propagandist, it’s got bells on it.

#90

What ?
They buy the world cheapest car for the 5-6 000 of dollars and … they expect to go anywhere on it;)
What a naive peoples those aussians:)
BTW Lada Niva was a good car for the mid 1970 whan it was firstly developed.

So there weren’t special educational privileges for children of party officials, according to their parents’ rank?

No there were no special privilagies.
Their parents-boss have the more abilities to get a job for childrens- howeve they have NO advantages in the Hight education.

So everybody had dachas, just like the senior party officials?

Dachas?:wink:
Mate you will wonder if you would know how less dahces mean in comparition with Modern privilegies of hight rank beurocrats ( both in the East and the West) like yahts, super-car, and personal castels with guard and prostitutes.:slight_smile:
This is not worthwhile to consider :wink:

The nomenklatura didn’t matter, didn’t even exist?

They existed as eveywhere.
However they were under strong control and pressure.
They easy could be centenced for the long time for the corruption.
So they were scared and …humble

Being simple is no obstacle to advancement in the West. Just look at George Bush. :smiley:

Oh mate i didn’t guess the Bush was born in the poorest Negroes ghetto;)
Or his father-Bush work hard on Ford Plants.
BTW in the USSR NOBODY of first Secretary of ComParty( Inspite of all previlegies) even dreamed to put his SON into his place.
This is was able ONLY in the USA;)

#91

Oh now you play are insulted :wink:
I didn’t wish it , honestly.

#92

It happened in the USA because he was elected, in a free and democratic process, if we forget about Florida and his brother Jeb first time around.

Fact remains, he was elected by the people (the small proportion who can be bothered voting), as was every president before him, and is subject to scrutiny and impeachment which no Russian or Soviet president has had to deal with during the same period.

America came into existence because of, among other things, opposition to a hereditary monarchy in the 1770’s. Russia, like most of Europe, was still putting the father’s son into power until 1917, in ways nobody in America has ever dreamed of since America threw off the monarchical shackles about 140 years earlier.

The post-1917 Russian / Soviet system certainly got rid of inherited power, but compared with America over the same period it left a lot to be desired in the way of good government and community harmony.

#93

First thing is: Who cares? And secondly, it’s easy not to have accidents when you don’t really fly much anymore and are heavily dependent on the West to maintain your programs…

You mean FREE APARTMENTS that was buildd by the state - yes you right it was enough long list.
However NOBODY forbided to buy the house for you money. As my perents made 35 years ago.
And…YOU DO not need to be a communist member to get the apartments;)

Who did say this buls… for you?

:slight_smile:
As doctor Goebbels told - then more insolent lie- then faster people believe in it.

“Free apartments?” What was the waiting list on those? About eight years? I’d rather live rent controlled and not pay too much while making a real salary based on my hard work…

And there was still a class system - there was the communist party members and then there was everybody else…

#94

A nation without social classes is an unfeasible utopia, like most of the communist doctrine.

I must said that this topic is turning definately to the wrongh direction.

#95

Agreed. I reopened this topic because various members requested I did so and promised to behave like adults within it. Instead, with a few honorable exceptions like Librarian it’s nothing but borderline flaming.

Calm it down and start discussing things politely, or this thread is going in the bin.

#96

Gordon Brown is the son of a Presbyterian minister - equivalent to a priest, and about as simple as you get.
Tony Blair was the son of a barrister (highly paid lawyer). However, his grandfather was the illegitimate son of two travelling actors, and was raised by a shipyard worker (again, very much bottom of the pile occupations).
John Major was the son of a music hall “artiste” - again, pretty lowly.
Margaret Thatcher was the daughter of a small shopkeeper and Methodist lay preacher.
James Callaghan was the son of a Royal Navy Chief Petty Officer (equivalent Russian rank is “гла́вный старшина” apparently) whose father died when he was nine years old.
Harold Wilson was the son of a “works chemist” and a schoolteacher.
Ted Heath was the son of a carpenter and a maid (domestic servant).
Alec Douglas-Home was the son of Alec, Lord Dunglass, and was also the grandson of two Earls.

Hence, we have to go back to Alec Douglas-Home (who was in office for less than a year in 1963-64) to find a British Prime Minister who does not “has the simple lineage”.
Didn’t expect that reply did you?

#97

Hat off for the Librarian! Great work!

#98

PK and pdf27

I don’t see this thread as developing in the undesirable way you suggest in your posts at #92 and #93 respectively.

I may be wrong, and I’m sure he’ll correct me if I am, but Chevan doesn’t mind a bit of robust debate.

This thread is, after all, about ‘hard facts about communism’. By definition, this is going to be contentious for the opposing sides.

There’s been a lot more latitude allowed in, for example, the Falklands thread when even more contentious issues such as alleged war crimes were debated, including by none other than PK with some vigor.

Perhaps the participants in the debate could post whether they feel that it needs mods’ intervention to calm it down, and the mods could base their decsions on those posts.

For my part, I don’t see a problem that warrants intervention.

#99

I haven’t joined this debate, but I have enjoyed it immensly. Really there is no need for mod intervention. Any such action could be construed as censorship.

digger

#100

Keep the fun going! :slight_smile: