01 May 06
Originally posted by Howell123The Soviet Union wasn't communist.
From 1945 to 1991 USA And the USSR (Russia) were on both different terms USA was Caitalist and USSR was Communist here is a list of key events and how they proved and if they actually won....
1. Korean War- Korea was divided in the 1950's from the 38 degrees pararlel North was controlled USSR South was controlled by USA. Stalin then ecncouraged North Ko ...[text shortened]... at cost?
USA 3 USSR 2
According to this it seems USA won but did anyone win the Cold War?
Communism means that the person who produces receives the benefits of what he produces and has an equal say in distribution.
In the USSR the State dictated what the person who produces something got for it and the State decided what was produced and how it was distributed.
In fact, you could say the State took over the role of the "Company" or "Multi-national".
Meaning that the former Soviet Union was more a form of State-capitalism than it was communism.
01 May 06
Originally posted by shavixmirhaha "state-capitalism" wadda larf.
The Soviet Union wasn't communist.
Communism means that the person who produces receives the benefits of what he produces and has an equal say in distribution.
In the USSR the State dictated what the person who produces something got for it and the State decided what was produced and how it was distributed.
In fact, you could say the State took o ...[text shortened]... ing that the former Soviet Union was more a form of State-capitalism than it was communism.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
01 May 06
Originally posted by WajomaAre you of the opinion that the ANZAC's did win a war?
hilarious
Just face it, most ANZAC's would prefer to avoid "win/loss" debates. The fact that the allied troops "won" the war is always eclipsed by the amount of men they lost at Gallipoli. To them, they lost. They lost their mates, their families and their lives.
01 May 06
Originally posted by chancremechanicYes, but the issue is whether there is some kind of global, co-ordinated Threat with a capital 'T', or whether there are various small groups of loonies independent of each other.
I think the "new threat" slammed into the World Trade Centers....😲
The publicity the West has given to certain loonies - Bin Laden chief among them - only encourages them to distribute their looniness by means such as the internet, where it is picked up by other people. The idea of al-Qaeda is arguably more dangerous than any one group of people holed up in the mountains of Afghanistan.
I'm not explaining this terribly well, seeing as how I'm trying to summarise several hours of documentary.
01 May 06
Originally posted by flyUnityChess games have a definite end and no aftermath. In real life, the survivors have to keep on going.
What do you mean "No one wins wars"? There is always a winner, or a loser, or a stalemate. If I play a game of chess, and I checkmate you, I WON the game, even though I lost half of my peices.
02 May 06
Originally posted by XanthosNZhahaha, are y'all the same people that complain about the Iraq war?
Shame Americas actions at the end of WW2 caused the whole thing in the first place. If only you'd listened to Churchill.
what should the US have done with the Russians? slapped em around a bit, a few minor trouncings to show 'em we meant business?