|
13 Apr 03 - 01:36 AM (#932196) Subject: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: Troll I thought you might find this interesting. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/13/wrus13.xml&sSheet=/portal/2003/04/13/ixportaltop.html troll |
|
13 Apr 03 - 02:05 AM (#932217) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: Little Hawk Doesn't surprise me a bit. There's a very big game going on in the World, troll, and Saddam was just a bit player (the latest "face" for the American public to obsess about, so as to provide homefront support for a needless and illegal military action). The game goes way back...to the funding and training of mujahedeen by the USA to bleed Russia white in Afghanistan and destabilize and hopefully break up the Soviet Union. That part succeeded. After that...to get possession of the Caspian oil. That part is well under way. Russia has been profoundly damaged, very badly hurt, and of course they are looking for ways to strike back and not lose anything more than what they already have. This is power politics...economic war...coupled with military adventurism. It's the great game. America and Britain are carving out a new Empire from the remains of the old Soviet Union, and Russia and a bunch of small countries have been the big losers so far. The Russians know it, and they are doing exactly what the West is doing...every sneaky and underhanded thing they can think up. From their point of view, it's survival. You regard them as evil for so doing? They are no more evil than the people you regard as "the good guys". And that is your error. There are no good guys in this game except the ordinary people everywhere who are just trying to live their lives in a peaceful and productive fashion. - LH |
|
13 Apr 03 - 09:57 PM (#932753) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: mack/misophist I would edit Little Hawk's comment by adding that the Russians, even under the Czars, have always been supreme pragmatists. They take 'national interests' very seriously. |
|
13 Apr 03 - 11:20 PM (#932795) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: CarolC So. Pre-emptive war against the Russians then, is it? |
|
14 Apr 03 - 12:04 AM (#932812) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: Little Hawk That would be a very juicy and tempting plum to contemplate for the madmen making policy behind the Oval Office, somewhere down the road...were it not for the fact that the Russians have several thousand nuclear warheads with good delivery systems. Even Wolfowitz and Cheney aren't that crazy...I hope. The Russians were in bad shape under Yeltsin. He was a drunk, an incompetent, and a mere political opportunist. Putin is none of those things. He is disciplined, smart, and clear-headed. It's a good thing. We don't need a drunk or a fool in command of Russia at this juncture in history. - LH |
|
14 Apr 03 - 12:21 AM (#932820) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: Art Thieme LH Pretty brilliant. Puts me in mind of my first inkling of "The Great Game"----It Was Kipling's novel, KIM. Then I realized it wasn't fiction. Art |
|
14 Apr 03 - 06:30 PM (#933470) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: McGrath of Harlow The thing about the Cold War was that it wasn't really much to do with ideology as such. The fact that Russia is mafia capitalist now instead of state capitalist doesn't really alter things that much. |
|
14 Apr 03 - 06:37 PM (#933477) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: McGrath of Harlow People keep on saying that the collapse of the USSR and it's shows that ideas about Socialism just don't work in practice. The truth is much closer to what Chesterton said about Christianity: "The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult, and left untried." |
|
14 Apr 03 - 07:00 PM (#933491) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: robomatic Or as Kison put it: "Socialism is a wonderful theory, the only problem is that it CAN be realized." |
|
14 Apr 03 - 07:22 PM (#933503) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: CarolC Or as Kison put it: "Socialism is a wonderful theory, the only problem is that it CAN be realized." Yup. Right here in the US, for instance. Our system is a blend of Capitalism and Socialism. |
|
14 Apr 03 - 07:23 PM (#933504) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: CarolC One system that's never really been tried is "Free Market Capitalism". |
|
14 Apr 03 - 07:51 PM (#933532) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: McGrath of Harlow A free market is one thing; capitalism is something else. |
|
14 Apr 03 - 08:50 PM (#933566) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: GUEST,petr first of all - define what you mean by socialism. The meaning in the context of Russia and the communist revolution, was that socialism was a step along the way to the distant goal of the pure communist state - when the state has 'withered away' and people govern themselves. THis is totally unrelated to any western sense of socialism - ie. left/liberal emphasis on social policy - an economy that serves society. second, its been tossed about here that Russia may have been better off under the communists. I doubt that very few Russian would want to go back. In Czechoslovakia, at one point it was illegal to have a vegetable garden - because people might sell their produce under a capitalist farmers market, can you imagine that happening here? and little hawk - while the US aided the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, (the stinger missiles certainly turned the tide) the Russian defeat in Afghanistan did not lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Economy was heading for collapse since the 70s. Ironically the arms race renewed by Reagan probably contributed more than anything else. the other reason the Soviet Empire fell apart is because it was just that. The de-colonization that happened to Europe in the post war years, just came later to RUssia, most of the central asian republics, such as Chechnya, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan etc. never joined in a Russian federation willingly. after the Holocaust the second great evil of the 20th century was the red terror. Millions died under Stalins purges, 30 million died in the famine in Ukraine while Stalin exported butter. as well as the Countless numbers who died or languished in the Gulag. no to mention the dumb projects like railways going nowhere, building dams trying to reverse rivers - there was massive environmental damage the Aral sea is just one example. there is a great deal of potential in Russia - their education system is superior to the west (having gone to school on both sides Ive seen the differences) and the country has vast natural resources. it will just take them a few years to get it together. - the russians certainly didnt want the americans to invade Iraq - mainly because after the war the influx of Iraqi oil would only drive the price down, and RUssia is still a huge exporter of oil. THat convoy of RUssian diplomats leaving Baghdad, that was fired upon accidentally- had according to some reports far too many vehicles for the number of people that were to be leaving. (documents? or Saddam) |
|
14 Apr 03 - 09:07 PM (#933575) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: CarolC petr, I'm guessing you aready know that Socialism and Capitalism are economic systems rather than political ones, and that the Soviet Union had a mostly Socialist economic system with a Totalitarian political system. The economic system in the US includes both Socialist and Capitalist institutions, in a Democratic political system (for the time being, anyway). Social Security is an example of a socialist institution. The public school system is another. |
|
15 Apr 03 - 12:10 AM (#933657) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: Little Hawk Excellent analysis of the Russian situation, Petr. I pretty much agree with what you've said. I would not say that the Afghan war was the sole or even the most overriding reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union, but it hastened that collapse in a number of ways. It was Russia's Vietnam. You are entirely correct that the Red Terror under Stalin was one of the greatest evils of the 20th century, along with the Holocaust. Add to that the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward (Ha!) under Mao Tse-Tung, and the incredible atrocities committed by the Khymer Rouge (who were so evil and mad that I supported Vietnam's invasion of Kampuchea...the only case of direct pre-emptive attack by one country on another that I have ever supported). As Carol points out, socialism and capitalism are economic systems, not political systems. They can coexist easily with either democracy, dictatorship, or oligarchy, and they have done so on frequent occasions. Most societies are a mixture of socialism and capitalism, which is sensible. The following are almost always socialist in nature: The family (everyone gets an equal share, providing it's a healthy family). The armed forces. The public school system. Public transportation systems. The police. Some of the media systems. Medicare and hospitals. Federal, State, and municipal governments. The justice system. And so on... These things are socialist, because to do them in any other way would be unworkable and asinine, though some people are stupid (or greedy) enough to try it. Watch out for any system that tries to make EVERYTHING either socialist or capitalist, but not both. Watch out for any politician who does that too. It would be as foolish as trying to force everyone to be either male or female...an unworkable notion. (Socialism, by the way, is pretty analagous to the female aspect of humanity, while capitalism is pretty analagous to the male aspect...in a number of ways. The female is inclined to serving others cooperatively, the male is inclined to serving self aggressively. You can find all kinds of individual exceptions to that, but as a general traditional rule the analogy holds up well. The female is the more mature and responsible aspect, but the male is a necessary part of the whole.) The biggest weakness of the Communists was that they tried to make EVERYTHING socialist (except the perks of the leading elite). The biggest weakness of neo-conservatives is that they try to do exactly the opposite and make EVERYTHING capitalist (and enrich the leading elite). Both systems involve the establishment of a privileged ruling oligarchy, and the defrauding of the general public. Now, huge corporations are actually a kind of socialist oligarchy masquerading as free market supply and demand, when they are not really that at all...but it's an oligarchy that only serves the elite few...hmmmm...sounds like Soviet Russia, slightly removed. The talk is different. The style is different. The walk is much the same. - LH |
|
15 Apr 03 - 01:06 PM (#934037) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: GUEST,petr good points lh. , although I say again, you and CarolC are mixing up the definitions. the western concept of socialism (like the NDP party in Canada)is totally unlike the Soviet meaning - under Karl Marx original definition was a state that is the transition to a pure communist state. |
|
15 Apr 03 - 01:11 PM (#934041) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: CarolC petr, can you point me in the direction of an online source for a good definition from the Soviet perspective? I'd be interested in reading more about it. |
|
15 Apr 03 - 01:46 PM (#934062) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: Troll petr, thanks for your post on the Russian System. Regarding the schools, our school system is a good one with much to offer but it lacks one essential ingredient. No, not money. It lacks students who are motivated to take advantage of what it has to offer, and parents who want to be involved with their childrens education. The children in the US have always had it good -relative to the rest of the world- and have never been made to realize that it's up to THEM if the good times are to continue. Their parents are too busy " just doing my own thing and being me" to be involved and this is what is needed more than any amount of government funding. In Russia, the kids and their parents know that education is the only way out of the grinding life in the factory or the farm. |
|
15 Apr 03 - 02:11 PM (#934071) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: Little Hawk Right on, troll! Want to find motivated students who value the opportunity to learn? Go to Mexico. Go to Cuba. Go to any disadvantaged country. The maturity of the young people I met in Cuba was inspiring and stunning, in comparison to their North American counterparts, who are so befuddled by their Nintendos, their fast food, and their ridiculous lifestyle that they have seemingly little idea of what a self-indulgent rut they are stuck in...or how to get out of it. The dozen Canadian high school kids I accompanied to Cuba got the message in about 3 days. They were amazed by the Cuban kids. It changed all of them and woke them up. I hope they stay awake. Petr - Yeah, well, pure Marxist theory is not what I call socialism. It's unrealistic, but I think it can work in a small tribal community...certainly not in a large industrial society. - LH |
|
15 Apr 03 - 05:17 PM (#934206) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: McGrath of Harlow The pity is that the Russians weren't allowed to try out how things would work out if they ditched the political repression but retained a predominantly socialist system for the economy. That was essentially what was meant by "perestroika". |
|
15 Apr 03 - 05:32 PM (#934223) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: Little Hawk Yeah. Gorbachev gave his people an unprecedented chance to peacefully transform their society, and they weren't mature enough to take what he offered them and achieve it. Plus, Yeltsin was hanging on the side like a jackal to pounce on the spoils, and deluding people with false promises he couldn't possibly come through on. It was a great pity. Bombastic BS won out over calm, reasoned intelligence and imagination. The West did not help out any in the process, because the West is also mostly run by jackals. - LH |
|
15 Apr 03 - 05:44 PM (#934234) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: GUEST, heric The article includes the following quote: "Moscow also provided Saddam with lists of assassins available for 'hits' in the West." You all seem disinterested in that. I don't have much faith in that paper, since they made (unless I'm mistaken) pre-war reports of Sadam threatening to use chemical weapons on the US/UK troops. However, you people can read this, apparently take it as true, and, apparently, boringly obvious? |
|
15 Apr 03 - 06:15 PM (#934263) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: McGrath of Harlow As you say heric, the stuff in that report seems pretty questionable. Agents are prone to massage the truth in their reports, so even if the papers are genuine it doesn't mean they are true. However the underlying assumption seems fair enough. The fact is, the antagonism between the USSR and the USA wasn't primarily to do with the economic setup in the USSR. Although this has changed somewhat, and so have other things, so that it's "Russia" these days, this doesn't mean the antagonism has gone. In fact with US forces settled in throughout lkarge parts of the old Sovet Union, and with NATO now up to the Russian borders, there is in some ways more reason for antagonism than there was in the old days. |
|
15 Apr 03 - 06:36 PM (#934280) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: Little Hawk Considerably more reason. Much of their former oil resources are being stolen now, under the euphemism of a "War on Terrorism" (prosecuted BY terrorists in uniforms). And the Great Game goes on. - LH |
|
15 Apr 03 - 08:27 PM (#934353) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: greg stephens Two days after Sep 11, i wrote a letter to the Guardian(they didnt publish it) saying "I think you should open up the Cliche Cupboard and get the "Great Game " out. You're going to need it". I think I was right. |
|
16 Apr 03 - 02:44 PM (#934892) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: Troll L.H., I think that this is true in all industrial societies. The young people have no memory of hard times and their parents have labored to shield them from hard times. They do not know what it is like to have no job, money, or prospects. My own son is a case in point, although now that he is married (at 20) with a baby on the way, he is beginning to see the value of education and a good work ethic. But it is sad to see vast amounts of money thrown at a problem that can only be solved by a change in attitude. troll |
|
16 Apr 03 - 05:26 PM (#934987) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: Little Hawk troll - Yup. Sure is. greg - Here's another cliche for you: "What goes around comes around." (I'm referring to unprovoked aggression, terrorism, and land theft.) The reason cliches become cliches is precisely because they are so apt. |
|
16 Apr 03 - 05:48 PM (#934998) Subject: RE: BS: Our Buddies the Russians From: McGrath of Harlow You don't need to be very old in the United Kingdom, just for example, to remember a time when young people had no jobs and no prospects of jobs in enormous numbers. And insofar as that has got better it's nothing to do with changes in the attitudes of people who've been thrown on the scrapheap. |