Most of that ended with Stalin. While certainly tragic, Stalin was much more of a dictator than the other Soviet leaders. Soviet Union c. 1950 != Soviet Union c. 1990.
OT, but is that the right word for them? I was thinking maybe Kyrgyzi, or :shudder: Kyrgyzs.
I’m really not sure, Kyrgyzstan is not one of the countries I’ve studied much. In Russian it would be Kyrgyzi.
For some reason, I don’t think this problem arises very frequently in English, though maybe there is a “rule” for it. Let me e-mail a friend who is an English teacher and see if she knows. 
But history keep producing the same sort of situations, so learning about historical precedents is useful. For example, Germany intentionally sought to overthrow the Russian government during World War I. Their efforts succeeded and in the short term Germany benefited. But the Soviet government which replaced the Imperial government eventually caused more harm to Germany than the original probably would have. Some people believe the United States intentionally sought to overthrow the Soviet government in the 1980’s. It may take another generation before we know whether this change of government was a long term advantage for the United States.
A hundred years from now, the historical consensus may be that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the event which led to the rise of the Chinese Empire which later enslaved half the world and destroyed the United States with their nanotech weaponry in World War III.
The CIA World Factbook says “Kyrgyzstani”… I don’t agree with that, but whatever, they probably know more than me.
Well, in that case, the good people of Kyrgyzstan have more to worry about than what we are calling them. O_O
It’s perfectly logical. Once you start from assuming that removing Saddam was wrong, you bound to come to conclusion that bringing down SSSR was also wrong. What’s your next step?
A complete non sequitur, and utterly off-topic, to boot. Please step away from the computer.
Usually in English, Kyrgyz is used to refer to the ethnicity, and Kyrgyzstani to citizens of Kyrgyzstan, not all of whom are ethnically Kyrgyz. I’ve usually seen pluran forms of Kyrgyz for the ethnicity, and Kyrgyzstanis for the nationality. And to make matters worse, the Russian word for nationality, natsional’nost’, is usually used to mean “ethnicity.” When Russian speakers discuss citizenship, as in what passport a person holds, they use a different word, grazhdanstvo.
But then in the Soviet Union, your passport (the internal one, which was really a compulsory national ID card), listed your ethnicity as well.
Do you have a headache yet? 
What “little terrors” are you talking about? Do free Russians bother you? Or are you bothered by the free (to borrow the list):
Ukranians
Latvians
Lithuanians
Estonians
Poles
Czechs
Slovaks
Hungarians
Bulgarians
East Germans
Romanians
Uzbeks
Kazakhs
Kyrgyz
Tajiks
Turkmenis
Georgians
Armenians
Chechens
Azerbaijanis
?
There were no “little terrors” set loose upon the world by collapse of SSSR.
There is only one big terror of radical Islamists. It exploded in 1979 when Khomeini took over Iran. It hit simultaneously at US (attacks on embassies in Iran and Pakistan) and SSSR (murder of Soviet advisors in Herat).
True, Soviets were trying to strangle it at infancy by invading Afghanistan. Do you advocate they should’ve been given a free hand to finish the job?
When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, it created the largest refugee problem in the world.
The Soviet Union maintained a ‘Gulag Archipelago’ of millions of people, who worked hard labor on state projects and died at an alarming rate.
The Soviet Union worked to actively destabilize the Middle East, Central and South America, and Asia. If you want to know why the U.S. is so cozy with Saudi Arabia, forget Moore’s idiotic conspiracy theories about Bush and Oil. Instead, look back to the cold war. Saudi Arabia was one of our only friends in the Middle East. Countries like Syria and Iraq were firmly in the Soviet sphere of influence. Almost all their weapons were Russian or Chinese.
The Soviet Union brutally repressed people all though eastern Europe. The Berlin wall was there for a reason, folks. If the citizens love your country, you don’t have to put up walls to keep them in.
The Soviet Union was an evil empire. It’s collapse was one of the best things to happen to planet Earth since the fall of Hitler.
Of course, the immediate aftermath can be messy (and it’s only been 13 years since the collapse). I imagine the United States was somewhat worse off ten years after the war of independence than it was immediately before.
Of course there were. To say otherwise is to ignore events of the past decade.
The Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan and the communist secular regime in that country collapsed. It was replaced by the Taliban and became a home base for al Qaeda. Bad for the Afghanis; bad for the rest of the world.
The collapse of communism in Eastern Europe led to the breakup of Yugoslavia and ethnic warfare.
That same collapse has led to a huge explosion in organized crime in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. These criminal organizations are also moving into the United States and Western Europe.
The loss of Soviet subsidies destroyed the economies of several third world nations and led to starvation and civil war.
Soviet nuclear technology has been found for sale to rogue nations and terrorist organizations.
The elimination of the Soviet threat has probably contributed to the resurgence of Chinese expansionist claims.
So again, on the balance the collapse of the Soviet regime was probably a good thing. But it did create some problems that shouldn’t be ignored.
I say you posted this OP because you’re pissed over St. Ronnie getting the credit for bringing down the Berlin Wall.
If those goddam Ruskies had been just a little tougher and held out a few more years, Billary cound have received the credit and you’d have been happy with the USSR’s downfall.
What say you, am I correct?
Gezuntheit.
Sam Stone:
Iraq was??? How did Reagan ever get chummy with the regime if they were in the Soviet sphere of influence?
Iraq definitely leaned towards the Soviet Union. Almost all the Arab states did. That’s why almost all the Arab states use Soviet weaponry. I believe they received direct military aid from the Soviets, just as the U.S. gave military assistance to Israel.
Admittedly, around the time of the Iran/Iraq war, both the Soviet Union and the U.S. were pretty far removed. Even after the Shah fell, Iran stayed pretty neutral and didn’t really move in the Soviet camp like the U.S. expected.
Which Chinese claims? Chinese were always claiming Taiwan. What else are they claiming nowadays?
Which “rogue nations and terrorist organizations” managed to acquire “Soviet nuclear technology”?
Which “third world nations” are you talking about, specifically?
Where do you think all those hard-core criminals sprang from? Do you think they are unemployed ex-Soviet gardeners? SSSR was a huge terrorist state, rearing andd training such types as a matter of state policy.
Yugoslavia was isolated from Soviet block for decades. It was much closer to the West then to Moscow.
Was Soviet backed Communists good for Afghanis? Afghanis didn’t think so. Why do you think they revolted? Do you know about carpet-bombing of civilian populations of the whole cities? Do you know about tanks against peaceful demonstrations? Do you know about systematic secret police executions? Oh, but perhaps it was good for “the World”!
It’s really simple. If Soviets didn’t try to impose Communist regime on Afghanistan, if Soviets didn’t use their custom brutality on Afghanis, if Soviets were conducting sensible diplomacy, there would be no decade long war in Afghanistan, there would be no room for Taliban, Al Qaida and bin Ladin there.
It all comes to one point: if only Soviets could be sensible! But Soviets were not sensible by definition. They were not just another “difficult” country, like France or somesuch. Theirs was a hostile ideology, determined to wage a war against the West by all means possible, and their methods were extremely brutal.
I’m not going to conduct a class on “World Affairs 1991-2004” in this thread. If you really want answers to your questions, go read a book. If, as I suspect, you think you already have all the answers, just go.