Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Comrade P.]

You know, this thread is a mini-Cold War. We have, let's call it side 1, where people claim that Russia is right now and was right before, we have relatively neutral camp and we have side 2, where are people that claim Russia was wrong all the way.

Sadly, last time Russia lost Cold War 

[10ebbor10]

Truly, I don't think anyone lost or won the Cold War. It just ceased to exist when the USSR did.

[Comrade P.]

Truly, I don't think anyone lost or won the Cold War. It just ceased to exist when the USSR did.

Well, yes. I consider the fact that USSR has fallen apart as a defeat in the Cold War. It is sad for me, but we continue living, right?

[GlyphGryph]

Truly, I don't think anyone lost or won the Cold War. It just ceased to exist when the USSR did.

Well, yes. I consider the fact that USSR has fallen apart as a defeat in the Cold War. It is sad for me, but we continue living, right?

The USSR was undoubtedly defeated, but that doesn't imply the USA won, especially since I was under the impression that said defeat was essentially a collapse rather than an outside take down. The USA suffered a lot of losses during the cold war too, both domestic and abroad, and gained... well, not a whole lot. If the US "won" the cold war, it was a pyrrhic victory that only served to justify the stupid and evil decisions they made about a whole host of issues that they were only able to choose because the USSR provided such a convenient enemy and a justification for arguing "we HAVE to do this terrible thing because THEY are so much worse!".

They came out of it better than the USSR did, but that's a pretty low standard for "winning" in my book.

[kaijyuu]

blah blah no one actually wins wars blah blah hippie stuff blah blah love and peace blah blah

[GlyphGryph]

blah blah no one actually wins wars blah blah hippie stuff blah blah love and peace blah blah

Nah, people can definitely win wars. Winning a war is when you end up better off than if you hadn't fought the war at all. The Allies definitely won WWII, for example. (All of them, Russia included) The US won the Cold War about as much as they "won" the war in Iraq, though.

But back to Ukraine stuff...

[Comrade P.]

Truly, I don't think anyone lost or won the Cold War. It just ceased to exist when the USSR did.

Well, yes. I consider the fact that USSR has fallen apart as a defeat in the Cold War. It is sad for me, but we continue living, right?

The USSR was undoubtedly defeated, but that doesn't imply the USA won, especially since I was under the impression that said defeat was essentially a collapse rather than an outside take down. The USA suffered a lot of losses during the cold war too, both domestic and abroad, and gained... well, not a whole lot. If the US "won" the cold war, it was a pyrrhic victory that only served to justify the stupid and evil decisions they made about a whole host of issues that they were only able to choose because the USSR provided such a convenient enemy and a justification for arguing "we HAVE to do this terrible thing because THEY are so much worse!".

They came out of it better than the USSR did, but that's a pretty low standard for "winning" in my book.

I actually had no clear vision of how that looked like from, you know, their side. Anyway, world is no longer bi-polarized.

blah blah no one actually wins wars blah blah hippie stuff blah blah love and peace blah blah

Nah, people can definitely win wars. Winning a war is when you end up better off than if you hadn't fought the war at all. The Allies definitely won WWII, for example. (All of them, Russia included) The US won the Cold War about as much as they "won" the war in Iraq, though.

[sarcasm]Oh, thank you very much for including us into the Ally group.[/sarcasm] Nevermind that. That shouldn't be said at all. Sorry.

[GlyphGryph]

mentioned them specifically because with how many people they lost during the war putting a stop to Hitler's war machine on the eastern front, it could be argued that it was at best a pyrrhic victory for them then, but honestly the alternative was still probably worse.

And also to specifically get ahead of anyone who might try to claim that they weren't part of the victory.

[Guardian G.I.]

-snip-

Beznogim, I understand your point of view, but I think that your attempts to explain the necessity of Soviet policies are fruitless. As your signature says, НЕ ПЫТАЙТЕСБ ЧТОТ0 NЗМЕНИТЬ. The majority of people here come from countries where the concept of "necessary sacrifice" is regarded as ultimate evil. Individualist societies cannot accept loss of human life no matter how necessary it might be for the country. Stalin's policies will always be regarded as absolute evil from Western point of view, even though from Stalin's viewpoint, his actions were necessary to ensure survival of the Soviet Union. It's not just a conflict of political ideologies, the moralities of Western and Russian societies contradict each other here.

Truly, I don't think anyone lost or won the Cold War. It just ceased to exist when the USSR did.

Apparently some people in the West think or at least thought that because of the collapse of the USSR, Russians should behave like Germans after WW2 - constantly stress that they were wrong, constantly apologize for their history and ban practically every display of national pride.

Alright, let us not discuss history any more, shall we?

[nenjin]

The majority of people here come from countries where the concept of "necessary sacrifice" is regarded as ultimate evil.

Oh please, like Russia is the only one that's sacrificed for something.

Here's the difference: over here, "necessary sacrifice" is a choice of last resort. Not, you know, international politics in general, as Putin seems to believe. All this "our hand was forced" nonsense is trying to make the rest of the world feel responsible for a choice Putin deliberately made, and with the flimsiest of pretexts.

Honestly, watching Russia try and justify their choices is like watching someone try to lie to you about what they just posted on social media.

[Frumple]

Heh. No, I think the west does have a fairly solid understanding of the concept of necessary sacrifice, and it's not necessarily a negative one. See it crop up in relation to military and emergency response service all the time, personally. West just tends to use words besides "sacrifice" to describe involuntary sacrifice. Words trending toward tragedy or atrocity, generally

[Mephansteras]

Actually, I'm finding the views shown by both sides here about History to be very enlightening.

Beznogim, I understand your point of view, but I think that your attempts to explain the necessity of Soviet policies are fruitless. As your signature says, НЕ ПЫТАЙТЕСБ ЧТОТ0 NЗМЕНИТЬ. The majority of people here come from countries where the concept of "necessary sacrifice" is regarded as ultimate evil. Individualist societies cannot accept loss of human life no matter how necessary it might be for the country. Stalin's policies will always be regarded as absolute evil from Western point of view, even though from Stalin's viewpoint, his actions were necessary to ensure survival of the Soviet Union. It's not just a conflict of political ideologies, the moralities of Western and Russian societies contradict each other here.

It's not that. The West does have a concept of 'Necessary Sacrifice', it's just that the bar for when it becomes necessary seems to be quite different.

I think a lot of it has to do with an Expectation of Sacrifice. A Firefighter who dies in the line of duty is in many ways viewed as a 'necessary sacrifice' for society. They specifically risk their lives to save others and western society both expects this of them and lauds them for their heroics.

In much the same way Soldiers who die in the line of duty are treated as 'acceptable' Sacrifices (Although that varies much more depending on Popular opinion of the operation they were engaged in).

However the idea that the Government can decide for its citizens that they are a 'necessary' sacrifice for the good of the nation is an anathema. It is accepted that the primary Function of government in the west is to safeguard the lives and welfare of its citizens and any deviation from that has to have some major justifications behind it for people to even tolerate it.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

I'm not sure there's any justification for the 'acceptable sacrifice' of people

[Baffler]

So Russian soldiers have stormed Ukrainian vessels. Shots may have been fired. (Link in German.)

Weren't people discussing the future of the Ukrainian ships moored in Sevastopol a few days ago? It seems a decision has been made. The Russians haven't said anything about it (at least not that I've seen), but there don't seem to have been any casualties. American media sources report that "pro-Russian crowds" seized the ships, while the German source claims it was Russian soldiers.

[Mephansteras]

I'm not sure there's any justification for the 'acceptable sacrifice' of people

It's usually cases like quarantine or the like where the government has to sacrifice a small number of people in order to prevent many more people dying. There is pressure to find a better solution that doesn't involve any sacrifice, but that isn't always possible. That's about the only situation I can think of where people would find it acceptable, even if it is always regrettable.