That was the bonus, not falling to commie scum was the goal.
Kennan was right for the 50’s, but if I’d do it all over again I’d soften up on the hardcore regime changes in the 70’s and 80’s, we were winning with soft diplomacy so there was really no need to wreck peaceful healthy nations.
*- If you have any interest at all in board games Twilight Struggle is simply one of the best ever created.
People, not eggs were broken. Many died, many suffered, and it isn’t going to be over for a long, long time. There’s nothing admirable about using the people of poorer nations as a meat shield. We destroyed their hopes for a better future, condemned them to generations of suffering so we could use them as puppets and exploit them, and in the process demonstrated how utterly vile we are despite all our pretensions as some sort of beacon of hope for the world.
I’ll try, but this is probably futile.
Yes, bad things happened, and this is a shame. Could things have been handled differently? More than likely, yes. But of course, hindsight is always 20/20.
That being said, living in the US was, by far, much better than living in the Soviet Union. Being in Britain was better than being in Poland.
If the US had gone back into isolationism after WW2, there is a good chance the Soviets would have used their military might to “Export the revolution” across Europe, leading to probably millions, if not 10’s of millions of casualties. And possibly much more, as both Britain and France were nuclear powers by the 60’s.
It is my hope that we can learn from that time period, and when the times comes when the planet is once again a Bi-Polar (or more likely Tri-Polar) world, that the opposing powers can hopefully play the game without the long term damage that both the US and the Soviet Union did to the various pieces.
well, for one thing, I wouldn’t support the Apartheid Government over the majority of South Africans. That kind of thing doesn’t go down well when they turn out to have lost anyway, and you end up having to get Congress to override your own senile president’s veto just to get a modicum of justice for the oppressed…
…and ditto for lots of developing nations that got fucked over by the US supporting its dictators or the CIA assassinating its best and brightest.
And living in Angola and Mozambique was shittier than either.
And yet it was in shape to have just done the lion’s share of defeating Germany. And to have outproduced the USA in tanks and artillery during WW2. And posess the largest army in the world.
Those on the right in the United States exploited anti-Communism in order to discredit the reforms of the New Deal, and those that were desired by the civil rights movement.
Even now, those who regret the civil rights legislation of the 1960s condemn Martin Luther King Jr. for having friends in the American Communist Party. Because there is no evidence that King passed classified information to the Soviet Union, this is not a legitimate concern.
The contributions of the Soviet Union in defeating Nazi Germany merit our respect, as do the sacrifices of the Soviet people during the Second World War merit our sympathy.
NATO was probably justified. The critical mistake made by the United States was to assume that any government, however unpopular and dictatorial, was preferable in any country in the world than one that could be labeled “Communist.”
In 1953 the CIA helped overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran because it might lean toward the Soviet Union. The blow back of that overthrow was the Iranian Revolution of 1979, and the problems we have had with Iran since.
The War in Vietnam happened because the United States refused to sign the Geneva Agreement of 1954. That treaty scheduled elections for July 1956 to unify Vietnam. President Eisenhower estimated that as many as 80 percent of the Vietnamese supported Ho Chi Minh. Vietnam was unimportant to our security and our economy.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc? There are at least half a dozen known instances in which the US and USSR were at elevated alert and made preparations for strategic conflict (i.e. raising strategic alert levels, readying strike assets for immediate launch, semi-automated “Launch On Warning” alert), including the US Presidential Cabinet planning for a “preventative” strike (Cuban Missile Crisis) and a false positive attack warning (Petrov Incident). On a strategic scale, the US and USSR both regularly overestimated each others’ capabilities and their own reliability of detection and response, as well as cultural misapprehensions that amplified ideological differences into an irreconcilable gulf.
On a political field, the US supported many oppressive regimés on the basis of opposing communism in any form under a mistaken believe in a united Soviet-dominated Marxist-Stalinist front, even though this was not the case, and ironically caused many revolutionary fronts to turn to the Soviet Union for support. The US supported and later abandoned several regimés and movements that have later turned around to bite us in the arse. The same can be said for Soviet interventions and repercussions in the post-Soviet and post-Cold War environment.
The curious thing is, we are still basing many plans and organizational mandates upon Cold War-era mentalities, and we are still making the same mistakes. Those who do not learn from history…
Stranger
“Hindsight”? Garbage. What we did was blatantly evil and stupid, it didn’t require “hindsight” to realize that. It just required looking at people outside our borders as human, something Americans consistently refuse to do. We treat foreigners with less respect and compassion than we show to animals.
We are just as much the “bad guy” as the USSR ever was.
Oh, please, we haven’t improved even slightly. Just look at how we have acted towards the people of Afghanistan and Iraq. Rape, torture, exploitation, random killing and destruction.
Living in Vietnam was not very much fun. We devastated that country to prevent the ascension of a government as many as 80 percent of the Vietnamese wanted.
Please. It’s not even close.
I can’t wait.
From the looks of this thread we can’t even stop arguing about current issues in Cold War terms.
And sadly: … as are those who do.
The people who were raped, tortured or murdered by Americans or their puppets suffered just as much as those who underwent the same from Soviets or their puppets.
But as that noted humanitarian, Joseph Stalin, once noted “quantity has a quality all its own.”
Killing ten million people is significantly worse than killing ten people. Or even ten thousand.
Irrelevant, since as I’ve repeatedly said I’m talking about foreign policy.
I agree that this was people, not eggs, and that lives and hopes were lost and that it was a terrible price. The alternative, however, were repeats of WWII with nuclear weapons and rockets to carry them and the annihilation of civilization. A grim choice, but even faced with those alternatives as hind sight, I’d choose containment over Patton’s approach. And with Stalin in charge of the USSR at the time the choice was made, I think other choices were wishful thinking.
I don’t buy that for a moment. We weren’t “forced” to topple democracies, promote murder, rape and torture as methods of quelling rebellion, economically exploit much of the world, or to do most of what we did. It’s a false dilemma. And we kept it up long after Stalin was around and are still doing it. Communism was just an excuse for us indulging our own cruelty and greed, it wasn’t the reason for our behavior.
Yes of course, it was worse than South Africa and Rhodesia too especially under the post-colonial red dictatorships.
If we are going to deal with the USSR and the PRC what’s so wrong with dealing with an Apathareid South Africa and Rhodesia? The PRC’s policies against Tibetans, Uighurs, Christians, and the Falun Gong aren’t really any better that than of the South Africans and Rhodesians against blacks.
Yes the Soviet people not Mr. Stalin. Stalin was blind to the threat of the Nazis and basically allied with Hitler in the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.