Wow, this is really amazing historical revisionism.

Do you knwo the history of the Korean war? Stalin gave the okay to Kim to invade. You make it sound like the US was this international war monger while the USSR was somehow a dundering innocent on the world stage.

Official records have shown Soviet support for the communist government in Nicaragua along with funding for insurgents throughout the region.  Cuba, backed by the Soviet Union, also took a hand and even extended its insurgence into Africa.

Eastern Europe wasn't exactly living the high life under the boot of the Soviet Union. To argue otherwise is really, well just let me know if you really believe that Eastern Europe wasn't dominated by the Soviet Union so I can just ignore you from now on.

When I was a kid, we had the threat of nuclear annihilation hanging above us.  Now, that's largely gone. My kids don't have to worry about a Cuban Missile crisis or a Day after (sure, anything's possible but it's so unlikely that he might as well worry about an asteroid collission). 

The USSR was an agressive militaristic empire. Thank goodness it's gone - no thanks to the naivete of the far left protesters like the ones we saw in NY last week.

The USSR was an agressive militaristic empire. Thank goodness it's gone - no thanks to the naivete of the far left protesters like the ones we saw in NY last week.

Draginol.....I have to agree whole heartedly with your statement.....

Official records have shown Soviet support for the communist government in Nicaragua along with funding for insurgents throughout the region. Cuba, backed by the Soviet Union, also took a hand and even extended its insurgence into Africa.

Must be why Daniel Ortega flew to Moscow the day after John Kerry flew back to the states in an effort to reaffirm his commitment to the Soviets....unless one believes Notsohighlyevoled's revisionist history...in which Ortegas trip to Moscow was just a vacation.....

Do you knwo the history of the Korean war? Stalin gave the okay to Kim to invade. You make it sound like the US was this international war monger while the USSR was somehow a dundering innocent on the world stage

Please note, I never included North Korea as an autonomous communist country. The Soviets had as much hand in the formation of the DPKR in the north as the US had in the demolition of the People's comittees in the South. The US went as far as giving control of South Korea to the Japanese until they could land a military force. The US asked to divide Korea at the 38th parallel and the Soviets conveniently agreed when they could have taken the whole peninsula.

Draginol, you seem to have missed my main argument - that it is a mistake to assume tha, during the cold war, the Communist countries formed a cohesive "bloc" that fell under the directives of the USSR. The USSR could only impose its will absolutely within the Warsaw pact countries. There are many instances of Communist countries outside the warsaw bloc acting independentaly, and even contrary to the wishes of the USSR.

Official records have shown Soviet support for the communist government in Nicaragua along with funding for insurgents throughout the region. Cuba, backed by the Soviet Union, also took a hand and even extended its insurgence into Africa.

The Sandinistas could not have turned anywhere else. The US had embargoed the country and was proactively trying to undermine the country's economy (in this it succeeded, even going as far as mining Nicaraguas commercial harbour). The US used its influence within the world's financial institutions, including the World Bank, to undermine Nicaragua's credit rating and access to loans and funding.

As far as aiding other Central American countries, the USSR always helped communist causes, but did not instigate them. Even then the aid was paltry at best. What the US claimed as shipments of arms requisitioned for the invasion of other central american countries were actually for self defence. At the time self defence was necessary given the insugency (funded illegally by Reagan) being carried out by the Contras. Of course they turned to the USSR for aid. But the fact remains that they had to ask.

Cuba, backed by the Soviet Union, also took a hand and even extended its insurgence into Africa

This was mainly with Cuban initiative. The Cuban's sent 12,000 troops into Angola while the USSR sent none, only advisors and equipment. This intervention was mainly in reaction to the invasion by South Africa that was largely financed by the US. You also forget the the popular support for the MPLA.

It would also serve you well to recall that almost all movements supported by the USSR were nationalistic independence movements that were born of post-colonial political situations. Because of the poverty and prior subjugation and expolitation under Colonial (almost in all cases, capitalist - France, Britain, etc) rule, these countries naturally turned to leftist forms of governance and economics. Therefore the most obvious choice for them, as far as aid was concerned, was the USSR.

On the other hand, the US was all too often allied with the colonial masters in their effort to squash independence movements.

Eastern Europe wasn't exactly living the high life under the boot of the Soviet Union. To argue otherwise is really, well just let me know if you really believe that Eastern Europe wasn't dominated by the Soviet Union so I can just ignore you from now on.

I never asserted that Eastern Europe was living the high life. I asserted that the third world communist countries were not in the same position of Eastern Europe. In fact, i argued that their collective situations were entirely different from Eastern Europe. I also brought to your attention that Soviet control of Eastern Europe was only possible with Western collaboration. Everyone at Yalta and Potsdam conveniently forgot the Atlantic Charter and effectively handed over Eastern Europe to Stalin. Poland was forgotten so easily.

The USSR was an agressive militaristic empire. Thank goodness it's gone - no thanks to the naivete of the far left protesters like the ones we saw in NY last week.

Based on the evidence, so was the US. All though there is no defence of what the USSR did to Eastern Europe, we can not forget that they lost 20 million lives in the Second World war, while the US lost approx 400,000. Their economy had been devastated, while America's had doubled in the war years. They had come under attack by both Germany and Japan, the former being quickly rearmed by the US. More importantly, the Allies agreed to it, effectively accomplises to whatever happened afterwards.

Must be why Daniel Ortega flew to Moscow the day after John Kerry flew back to the states in an effort to reaffirm his commitment to the Soviets....unless one believes Notsohighlyevoled's revisionist history...in which Ortegas trip to Moscow was just a vacation.....

Ortega's trip was a plea for aid in a time of immense hardship, seeing that the US was so extremely helpful. Remember, Nixon visited China in 1972. What would you make of that! Of course he visited Moscow. He was getting aid from them. that is one thing. It is an entirely different ball game when you claim that the trip and the aid was really the machinations of a master plan to take over the whole of Central America and then march on to the States. The USSR had problems closer to home that demanded their attention and they realised that the Americas firmly fell into the American sphere of influence. They would help as far as their balancing of relations with the US wouldn't be interefered with.

These were essentially the wars and problems of Central America. The Soviets gave aid, but never to the extent and with as much direct interference as the US.

Marco

I don't support the kind of violence that you experienced in your counter-protest. I also don't support that folks probably stood by and let more radical protestors respond to you with violence. At the same time, I think it is a mistake to let the actions of a few serve as the description fo the 250-500K people protesting in NY. The Left is a rainbow mix of different groups who are committed to a wide array of issues and who deploy a wide array of tactics. Among them include Buddhists and Quakers and other pacifists who would NEVER engage in violence against counter-protestors.

But yes, there are also anarchists and others who have come to believe that peaceful protest is not enough. Their anger is high. Their belief in "direct action" is firm. Their tendency to oversimplify issues in search of an enemy to squelch is as strong as, well, yours apparently.

Sweeping generalizations get us nowhere. I work on a campus that has effectively squelched student protest (from both sides, but mostly on the Left) by constraining free speech to an incredibly small and non-central free-speech area (taking a tactic from the Bush Administration's playbook). Protests on the Left regularly meet with regulations and restrictions. Our chancellor recently tried to block domestic partner benefits because he thinks homosexuality is a sin. There were outcries as well as support for him. Meanwhile, students at a war protest die-in were brought up before the judicial review board in part beacuse they used fake blood made with corn syrup, apparently therefore vandalizing the paving stones.

The real evidence of your story is that tempers are hot and the country is clearly not only divided but also hot under the collar. Even if Bush wins in November, he ignores this anger at his (and our!) peril!

These were essentially the wars and problems of Central America. The Soviets gave aid, but never to the extent and with as much direct interference as the US.

Gee must have missed the cuban advisors in south and central america....the cubans were the soviets proxies in this region of the world and as such their goals were a mirror image of each other....

One point that is intresting to make with regards to the cold war was the infiltraition and outright use by the Soviets,Chinese, Cubans, etc. of the very same groups in the America's and Europe that opposed the US and the west....Protested US and Nato troop deployments in Europe...and anything else the KGB and its respective mirror agencies from the communists wanted....this isnt conjecter or flights of fancy....this is hard fact....Yuri Andropov (former KGB head and future leader of the USSR) lead this anti-west/US agenda....one funny note is the resurgence of some of the same groups protesting the US again with regards to the War on Terror...albeit without their funding from their former masters....I wonder where their funding is coming from now...be intresting to find out

The Left is a rainbow mix of different groups who are committed to a wide array of issues and who deploy a wide array of tactics. Among them include Buddhists and Quakers and other pacifists who would NEVER engage in violence against counter-protestors.

Well I'm intrested in the several polls taken of the protesters which put only bout 35% - 38% of them who support a Democrocy and Free Market Ecconomy...the rest fell into the passe' beliefs of Socialism and Communism, Anarchism, Pacifism....which gives creedence to the Utopian make-up of the protesters....frankly its high time they come down to reality..which given their perpensity for rehashed cold war rhetoric is not likely

Gee must have missed the cuban advisors in south and central america....the cubans were the soviets proxies in this region of the world and as such their goals were a mirror image of each other....

The Cubans were much more interested in international intervention in the area than the Soviet Union. In the case of Angola, the USSR became involved because of the prodding and requests of the Cubans, not the other way around. The USSR was much more interested in shoring up their own position and taking care of economic and political instability in their own sphere. This was basically the foundation of Detente. The USSR realised it could not compete, economically or militarily with the US.

This is not to say that they did not have any influence in the Third World, that they didn't attempt to influence the Third World, but not to the extent the US claimed and not to the extent that other revolutionary countries, such as Cuba and China (so called Soviet proxies), would have liked. In fact, the USSR and China were involved in something very close to competition in Southern Africa.

One point that is interesting to make with regards to the cold war was the infiltration and outright use by the Soviets, Chinese, Cubans, etc. of the very same groups in the America's and Europe that opposed the US and the west....

Usually, except in the case of Eastern Europe and the Middle East, there was no infiltration, but cases of Third World independence movements requesting Soviet aid. They had already chosen socialist or leftist principles as the best way to reconstruct their countries, so obviously they naturally gravitated towards the USSR.

The USSR took advantage of already occurring political developments in the Third World, while the US actively fought against the current situations and political trends (irrespective of what the people wanted) in these countries. They would not allow them to form left wing governments for no other reason other than their leftist leanings.

The USSR tried a more direct interventionist policy in Afghanistan and Eastern Europe and failed miserably. They could not even succeed closer to home, while the US had a great deal of success everywhere they did not resort to out right military intervention.

Which leads me back to the main thrust of my argument. The USSR was never as big a threat as the US made them out to be. It was convenient for successive US administrations to perpetuate this myth (even though many genuinely believed it, in spite of contrary evidence, thinking the cost of not believing it would be too great) for both foreign and domestic policy reasons.

Which brings us to the current administration and conservatism in general. Once again we have a malignant external threat that renders dissent and protest unpatriotic. It solidifies the need (illusory or not) for a conservative mainstream willing to back the administration no matter what the cost, no matter what the reality.

This makes conservatism the voice of the mainstream, of the politically expedient in a time of "crisis" and danger. The only channel allowed that is truly national in nature in times like this, for voices that are outside of the mainstream, or as you put it "leftist" (even though i stand by my assertions that this is a misnomer), are non-mainstream channels like protests, independent media and other media, such as the arts.

You guys have a voice, and it is a powerful one, the government of the United States of America, and a plethora of media organisations. For Pete’s sake, allow us ours.

Marco

except in the case of Eastern Europe and the Middle East, there was no infiltration

Suggest you do bit more of research there....the fact that anti-US groups with ties to the KGB and its soviet bloc proxies is a reality...facts to back this up are KGB files withing their archives opened up or leaked to the press..former head of Romanian intelligence, who defected to the west...has stated as much more that once...but I guess he was wrong...the KGB files were clerical errors....

You guys have a voice, and it is a powerful one, the government of the United States of America, and a plethora of media organisations. For Pete’s sake, allow us ours.

Depends who "us" is....if its members of the useful idiot mentality..then no ...if its members of those advocating turning the US into a socialist utopian nation..then no...if its those who in the aftermath of 9-11 sought to shift the blame to "perceived" wrongs of past and present US foreign policy as the real cause instead of the murdering bastards who were responsible and their financial puppet masters...then no...(by the way I see the same horseshit mentality being used in the wake of the horror of the school takeover in russia blaming it on Chetsnyan sepratists is very hollow)...than the answer is no....time for the left to wake up....

Suggest you do bit more of research there....the fact that anti-US groups with ties to the KGB and its soviet bloc proxies is a reality...facts to back this up are KGB files withing their archives opened up or leaked to the press..former head of Romanian intelligence, who defected to the west...has stated as much more that once...but I guess he was wrong...the KGB files were clerical errors....

What group's are you talking about? I find it hard to believe that the USSR would have to infiltrate governments that were actively asking for their help.

Depends who "us" is....if its members of the useful idiot mentality..then no ...if its members of those advocating turning the US into a socialist utopian nation..then no...if its those who in the aftermath of 9-11 sought to shift the blame to "perceived" wrongs of past and present US foreign policy as the real cause instead of the murdering bastards who were responsible and their financial puppet masters...then no...(by the way I see the same horseshit mentality being used in the wake of the horror of the school takeover in russia blaming it on Chetsnyan sepratists is very hollow)...than the answer is no....time for the left to wake up....

It heartens me to think that you can say "no" as much as you like and it won't make a damned difference. The constitution's Yes trumps your No everytime. Thank Christ for that.

Marco

Wow, you really are quite a communist sympathizer.  I kept thinking I was just mis-reading your posts, notso, but wow, I didn't think there were still communist sympathizers out there.

Wow, you really are quite a communist sympathizer. I kept thinking I was just mis-reading your posts, notso, but wow, I didn't think there were still communist sympathizers out there.

Put it this way, I was not sorry to see the communist system collapse.

My argument had as one of it premises that some of the politics in America has as its driving force and main justification external threat and danger that can only be reinforced by internal dissent and protest. Regardless of how i feel about communism, America used communism and its perceived threat as justification for foreign policy that was less than innocent or benevolent.

I am not saying that the USSR exempted themselves from the same type of behaviour, i was arguing that the situation that existed in the Soviet Bloc and the Middle East were markedly different from the situation in the Third World, and particularly in Asia, Central/Latin America and Africa. I was also arguing that the USSR, in these areas, took advantage of political developments and leanings that already existed (given that most post-colonial societies and those struggling for independence, naturally leaned to the left) and tried to reaffirm and consolidate them, while America acted in a fashion contrary to the natural political development of these societies.

Just because i do not agree with American foreign policy or the way the "mainstream" is reacting to protest, it does not necessarily mean that i am a communist sympathiser. In fact, i am not. I do see merit in socialism and progressive liberalism, but this hardly makes me a communist as i still believe in individual responsibility, initiative and freedom. This does not mean, however, that i see no role for the government to play in the organisation of society, its economics and the protection of the freedoms that the population decides on.

Marco

What group's are you talking about? I find it hard to believe that the USSR would have to infiltrate governments that were actively asking for their help.

Not...umm where did i say goverments?...the Soviets infiltraited and directed anti-us groups in the west....suggest once more you take a reality check....if you'd care to discuss this logiclly...a starting point would be the fact that the Soviets and their proxies in the eastern bloc managed to do great harm to US creditbility from the 1960's to mid-80's via communist front groups and the like...intrestingly the verona cables do lend credience to this as do KGB files and former Soviet bloc agents...

As to you being a communist sympathiser...well you may not condier yourself one but you do fall into the USEFUL IDIOT category....

Not...umm where did i say goverments?...the Soviets infiltraited and directed anti-us groups in the west....suggest once more you take a reality check....if you'd care to discuss this logiclly..

Interesting how, when you can't argue a point, you shift the argument. All this time we have been discussing Soviet influence in the Third World and all of a sudden you change it to anti-US groups in the west, without actually stating which groups they might be. I'll argue the argument, not the tangents you create because you can't argue the points.

As to you being a communist sympathiser...well you may not condier yourself one but you do fall into the USEFUL IDIOT category....

I was actually enjoying our discussion up until this point (and being called a communist sympathiser, i guess). If it lead to either of us going back and doing some research (it did on my part), than it can only be a good thing, a learning experience. And i always play the ball not the man - why?

As to you being a communist sympathiser...well you may not consider yourself one but you do fall into the USEFUL IDIOT category....

because that is a useless statement. You can't prove it and i can't disprove it. I don't even know what a usefull idiot is, i've never known one before (and we are supposed to recognise our own kind, right?). Once you come out with a statement like that, you have effectively lost, no longer able to argue in a rational manner, you revert to childhood insults. What a shame, i really was enjoying myself.

Adios,

Marco

Sorry. Please delete one. I'm sure you don't want stupidity duplicated on your thread

Marco

Interesting how, when you can't argue a point, you shift the argument. All this time we have been discussing Soviet influence in the Third World and all of a sudden you change it to anti-US groups in the west, without actually stating which groups they might be.

again when did i drift into goverments...i was talking bout groups...you drifted into that

I was actually enjoying our discussion up until this point (and being called a communist sympathiser, i guess).

actually..if you read my post i didnt call you a communist sympathizer....but i did say you followed the "Useful Idiot" mentality....now if you are unaware of this phrase....its a quote by stalin...."better one useful idiot than a hundred trained agents" and many from the left fall into this category....and in response to my article...the left finds no problem styfling differing views from theirs as long as they are able to make theirs known...which is what happened on the sunday in question....

You can also check the pages about nexium | nexium | http://www.nexium-pharmacy.info/ | buy viagra pill | buy viagra pill | http://www.buy-viagra-pill-online-pharmacy.info/ | valium without prescription | valium without prescription | http://www.valium-without-prescription-online-pharmacy.info/ | buy zoloft | buy zoloft | http://www.buy-zoloft-online-pharmacy.info/ | paxil cr | paxil cr | http://www.paxil-cr-online-pharmacy.info/ | internet drug store | internet drug store | http://www.internet-drug-store-online-pharmacy.info/ | true poker | true poker | http://www.true-poker-777.info/ | wrinkle cream | wrinkle cream | http://www.wrinkle-cream-online-pharmacy.info/ | herbal breast enhancement | herbal breast enhancement | http://www.best-online-shopping-site-medication.info/ | poker book | poker book | http://www.poker-book-website.info/ | drug store com | drug store com | http://www.drug-store-com-online-pharmacy.info/ | ... Thanks!!!

You are invited to check some information dedicated to business to business finance | business to business finance | http://www.business-to-business-finance-advisor.info/ | debt reduction | debt reduction | http://www.debt-reduction-4u.info/ | cheap flight | cheap flight | http://www.cheap-flight-e-site.info/ | government loan | government loan | http://www.government-loan-e-site.info/ | bad consolidation credit debt | bad consolidation credit debt | http://www.bad-consolidation-credit-debt-e-site.info/ | mortgage interest rates | mortgage interest rates | http://www.mortgage-interest-rates-ebanking.info/ | flowers online | flowers online | http://www.flowers-online-leading-site.info/ | consolidation debt loan | consolidation debt loan | http://www.consolidation-debt-loan-4u.info/ | apply card credit | apply card credit | http://www.apply-card-credit-4u.info/ | mortgage brokers | mortgage brokers | http://www.mortgage-brokers-ebanking.info/ | private mortgage insurance | private mortgage insurance | http://www.private-mortgage-insurance-ebanking.info/ | - Tons of interesdting stuff!!!

well it finally happened.....spam comments....I suspect the next ones will be spam sex comments....good grief...I think all sides on the political spectrum can agree this is a headache we dont wont