Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-01-2012, 11:38 PM
 
26,786 posts, read 22,567,030 times
Reputation: 10040

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
The Italian Communist party definitely had a lot of independence from Stalin -- though of course it didn't say no to funding from Moscow. It was the exception though in Western Europe. The French Communist Party was typically subservient to Moscow.
Even if they were subservient, it's not like Russians invented communism in Europe - apparently the ideas were floating in Europe independently from Russians and that was a big concern for the US gov. as far as I can see.

Quote:
And I agree the Soviets weren't getting aid even if they had wanted it -- and Stalin was smart not to fall into that trap -- but he should not have forced the Eastern Bloc to reject the money as well. It left the Eastern Bloc endlessly trying to make up the gap when it was completely impossible for them to do so. Of course that had nothing to do with the DEMISE of Communism, but it meant Eastern Europe would always be the "second world" whether Communism worked or not.
But if he would have allowed the Eastern Europeans to accept financing, they would have fallen out of his sphere of influence, because I don't think that the money were offered by the US with no strings attached; obviously there were political reasons behind such offering.) The well-being of Eastern Europe was not main Stalin's concern, particularly if to take in consideration that some of those Central European countries were the members of Axis. Stalin definitely wanted to create his own economic network; he didn't want to be isolated and that's what he came up with, as far as I can see;

"The USSR did establish COMECON as a riposte to the Marshall Plan to deliver aid for Eastern Bloc countries, but this was complicated by the Soviet efforts to manage their own recovery from the war. The members of Comecon looked to the Soviet Union for oil; in turn, they provided machinery, equipment, agricultural goods, industrial goods, and consumer goods to the Soviet Union. Economic recovery in the east was much slower than in the west, and the economies never fully recovered in the communist period, resulting in the formation of the shortage economies and a gap in wealth between East and West. Finland, which did not join the Marshall Plan and which was required to give large reparations to the USSR, saw its economy recover to pre-war levels in 1947."

"While the western portion of the Soviet Union had been as badly affected as any part of the world by the war, the eastern portion of the country was largely untouched and had seen a rapid industrialization during the war. The Soviets also imposed large reparations payments on the Axis allies that were in its sphere of influence. Austria, Finland, Hungary, Romania, and especially East Germany were forced to pay vast sums and ship large amounts of supplies to the USSR. These reparation payments meant the Soviet Union received about the same itself as 16 European countries received in total from Marshall Plan aid.[81]"

Marshall Plan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All these wouldn't have been happening, if he'd allow Eastern Europe to accept American money.


Quote:
I'm not an anti-communist at all personally. I am a definite admirer of a large social welfare net, and you need only look at the pending extinction of the American Middle Class following 30 years of failed Trickle Down Economics to show that less government regulation does not spread the wealth around. I do not want total Communism but I'd definitely like a mixed economy leaning more toward socialism than what the US currently has.
Ha-ha, I hear you.
Back in Soviet days we thought that Western "lefties" were simply crazy, but the longer I live, the more I am coming to conclusion that they are actually not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-01-2012, 11:45 PM
 
26,786 posts, read 22,567,030 times
Reputation: 10040
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12 View Post
You are trying to explain events from 1939 with events that took place in 1944???? In 1939 the US was still neutral.
How about 1941?1942?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2012, 11:46 PM
 
2,920 posts, read 2,799,318 times
Reputation: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
That's off topic from what was being debated... I must not be expressing myself well because my arguments keep getting misconstrued

But to answer your question, yes they should have been given a choice. But at the same time look at Communists being forced to leave governments in Western Europe to appease the US -- kind of the opposite side of the same coin.
Do you even know what did it mean to live under Communist regime? Do some reading buddy
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2012, 11:46 PM
 
26,786 posts, read 22,567,030 times
Reputation: 10040
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12 View Post
So to buy his time he attacked and occupied Poland and then Finland and Romania. That's not "buying time" lol
That's precisely "buying time," talking in consideration what has been written in the GeneralPlan Ost and Mein Kampf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2012, 11:50 PM
 
2,920 posts, read 2,799,318 times
Reputation: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
How about 1941?1942?
What about 1941 and 1942?

Stalin together with Hitler attacked Poland and the Finland and Romania. So much for peace loving Stalin.
Are you disputing this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2012, 11:51 PM
 
26,786 posts, read 22,567,030 times
Reputation: 10040
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12 View Post
Do you even know what did it mean to live under Communist regime? Do some reading buddy
Where? In Russia?
But we were not talking Russia with all her peculiarities, we are talking Europe in this case.
( Don't forget that life in Russia in pre-communist times was not a piece of cake either.
25 years of conscription time - just an example. How about that?)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2012, 11:55 PM
 
26,786 posts, read 22,567,030 times
Reputation: 10040
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12 View Post
What about 1941 and 1942?

Stalin together with Hitler attacked Poland and the Finland and Romania. So much for peace loving Stalin.
Are you disputing this?
And Britain/France were appeasing Hitler initially with partitioning of Czechoslovakia. ( I am not even mentioning all the loans that Germany received for militarization from the US and Great Britain.)
So much for "peace-loving" West.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2012, 12:19 AM
 
2,920 posts, read 2,799,318 times
Reputation: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
Where? In Russia?
But we were not talking Russia with all her peculiarities, we are talking Europe in this case.
( Don't forget that life in Russia in pre-communist times was not a piece of cake either.
25 years of conscription time - just an example. How about that?)
Do you think Communist italy would be different than Russia? Communist Germany wasn't.

Do you think tsar murdered even a quarter of people Communists did?
If tsar was ruling the Empire like the commies did house of Romanov would be at the helm until now.


What are you even comparing?

Last edited by rebel12; 09-02-2012 at 12:30 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2012, 12:23 AM
 
2,920 posts, read 2,799,318 times
Reputation: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
And Britain/France were appeasing Hitler initially with partitioning of Czechoslovakia. ( I am not even mentioning all the loans that Germany received for militarization from the US and Great Britain.)
So much for "peace-loving" West.
Yes. But they didn't take piece of it, did they?

Stalin attacked Poland, Finland and Romania taking territories from all this countries. How is it different from what Hitler did?

Leta not forget that Soviets kept on occupying Central Europe even 50 years after the war.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2012, 11:49 PM
 
26,786 posts, read 22,567,030 times
Reputation: 10040
Before I'll forget, I need to comment on a couple of things here, that are important for future references...

Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12 View Post

Spare me the stories about ancient Russians and show me Russian democratic traditions in the past 500 years.
You've read the material diagonally, apparently... The traditions of "mir" continued in Russia up until the revolution of the 1917 ( i.e. for the last 500 years including,) which makes Russians original communists.


Quote:
Those evil Americans, they even created the might of Chinese economy to the enjoyment of the Chinese themlseves. LOL. Chinese economy is not controlled from Washinhton or New York although many would like it this way.
These two economies are directly interdependent, since one created the other.
What part of it you do not understand?


Quote:
Yes, it parted way and while Europe had Magna Carta and French Revolution you had nothing of that.
At the beginning of the first war none of the monarchies involved were as absolutist as Russian one. Russia has always based its politics on the Bisantine tradition or "samodherzhavie" while Europe has much diferent traditions.
The reason why Russia became absolutist monarchy didn't have much to do with Bysantine tradition initially. In fact when Russia received her autocephalous church from Byzantium, back in those days she was very much divided into principalities, governed by different princes, not unlike Germany. However this separation ( and constant quarreling between Russian princes) made the country an easy prey for Tatar-Mongols, when Russian princes couldn't unite their resistance.
The only way Russians could finally remove the Tatar's yoke, was when prince of Moscow concentrated all power in his hands. That's what ultimately strengthened the nation, and laid the ground for absolutism. Before the Tatar invasion Russian democratic traditions were actually more advanced for those times comparably to Western Europe. ( Read about Russian "Veche" - you'll get the idea.)
Tatar-Mongol invasion is yet another reminder that Russia never had it easy comparably with the rest of Europe, and as someone mentioned here - "to be Russian is to be tough."

Quote:
There is nothing logical about your conclusions, you are simply repeating the same old Soviet propganda stories. Very quick: Russians simply stole nuclear technology from the US.
Right. They've probably stolen the space programs too...

Konstantin Tsiolkovsky - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You are obviously way too quick with your right-wing propaganda cliches ( I've already mentioned that earlier,) so here is something to consider while talking about that "stolen nuclear technology."
First of all the US was not the original "creator" of nuclear technology; Europeans were, the US as usual purchased everything and everyone.
As for Russians - don't forget that they were doing their research alone, in the midst of the devastating war, and although they were spying indeed, this is the synopsis of what exactly took place and how essential/non-essential the espionage was;

"In 1945, the Soviet intelligence obtained rough "blueprints" of the first U.S. atomic device, which may have contributed to the Soviet bomb project. Scholar Alexei Kojevnikov has estimated, based on newly released Soviet documents, that the primary way in which the espionage may have sped up the Soviet project was that it allowed Khariton to avoid dangerous tests to determine the size of the critical mass: "tickling the dragon's tail", as it was called in the U.S., consumed a good deal of time and claimed at least two lives; see Harry K. Daghlian, Jr. and Louis Slotin.

One of the key pieces of information, which Soviet intelligence obtained from Fuchs, was a cross-section for D-T fusion. This data was available to top Soviet officials roughly three years before it was openly published in the Physical Review in 1949. However, this data was not forwarded to Vitaly Ginzburg or Andrei Sakharov until very late, practically months before publication. Initially both Ginzburg and Sakharov, while working on the Sloika design, estimated such a cross-section to be similar to the D-D reaction. Once the actual cross-section become known to Ginzburg and Sakharov, the Sloika design become a priority, which resulted in successful test in 1953.

In the 1990s, with the declassification of Soviet intelligence materials, which showed the extent and the type of the information obtained by the Soviets from US sources, a heated debate ensued in Russia and abroad as to the relative importance of espionage, as opposed to the Soviet scientists' own efforts, in the making of the Soviet bomb. The vast majority of scholars agree that whereas the Soviet atomic project was first and foremost a product of local expertise and scientific talent, it is clear that espionage efforts contributed to the project in various ways and most certainly shortened the time needed to develop the atomic bomb.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_...e_Soviet_Union

This is minding you was taking place when no "great science and technology" of China or Korea was in sight, but Russians were doing their own thing independently/ in parallel with the West.
If you still have your doubts about that - have a look how far back Russian scientific research goes - back to the establishment of the Russian Academy of science, (since the times of Peter the Great.)

"In early 1930s, the Soviets were the instrumental contributors made to the advancement of nuclear physics and its related sciences, such as nuclear chemistry. The initial Soviet interest in nuclear physics had begun in the early 1930s through the Soviet Academy of Sciences, an era in which a variety of important nuclear discoveries and achievements were made (the identification of the neutron and proton as fundamental particles, the operation of the first cyclotron to energies of over 1 MeV, and the first "splitting" of the atomic nucleus by John Cockcroft and Ernest Walton). Even before the Russian revolution and the followed by the February Revolution, the mineralogist Vladimir Vernadsky had made a number of public calls for a survey of Soviet Union's uranium deposits. The main motivation for nuclear research at the time was radium, which had scientific as well as medical uses, and could be retrieved from borehole water from the Ukhta oilfields.

After the discovery of nuclear fission in the late 1930s, scientists in the Soviet Union, like scientists all over the world, realized that nuclear reactions could, in theory, be used to release large amounts of binding energy from the atomic nucleus of uranium. As in the West, the news of fission created great excitement amongst Soviet scientists and many physicists switched their lines of research to those involving nuclear physics in particular, as it was considered a promising field of research. Few scientists thought it would be possible to harness the power of nuclear energy for human purposes within the span of many decades. Soviet nuclear research was not far behind Western scientists: Yakov Frenkel did the first theoretical work on fission in the Soviet Union in 1940, and Georgii Flerov and Lev Rusinov concluded that 3±1 neutrons were emitted per fission only days after similar conclusions had been reached by the team of Frédéric Joliot-Curie."

Therefore this (along with other things that I've mentioned earlier) make your next statement profoundly false;

"Russians are not a part of European family."

They are part of European family indeed, that follows its own path and doesn't let the "other part" of European family to go uncontrolled in the world, which indeed is/was a problem for the US interests in particular. They've had enough of those pesky Russians, and when they saw their chance in the 90ies, the US gov. acted up on it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top