The Soviets invaded Afghanistan, a bordering country, after the USA had armed radical theocratic militias with modern weapons. And whatever they did in Afghanistan pales in comparison with US actions in non-neighboring Vietnam. If you want to see the true impact of the USSR in central-asian countries vs that of the west, why don’t you compare the Human Development Index of Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan (ex-Soviet republics) to that of Pakistan (ex-English colony).
It’s not a “whose worse” competition, but you tankies can’t seem to accept that countries other than the us also do and did bad shit. It’s all whataboutism with you.
Nobody in this thread is denying what the us has done, nor celebrating it. But keep on telling us what a nice guy Stalin was!
There we go, the generic word to refer to everyone who doesn’t uncritically peddle anti-communist discourse.
you tankies can’t seem to accept that countries other than the us also do and did bad shit.
But keep on telling us what a nice guy Stalin was!
I’m not a Stalinist. The great terror was terrible, unjustified, and overall a disaster. The collectivisation policy led to chaos and hunger. The democratic functioning of Soviets was seriously undermined. It’s just, as much as you probably don’t consider that the whole existence of the UK as a country is illegitimate as a consequence of its colonialist history, I don’t consider that the USSR as a whole should have been dismantled, and I consider that its overall impact on the world was positive, especially comparing it to what was before and to what came after.
The article doesn’t really dismiss the argument even if the initial paragraphs make it seem like it, it just concludes that it seems unlikely to reach a point where the US could leverage the influence on a future local government, which is true but does not exclude/invalidate the previous proposition
I’m not sure if you could apply to all of them… because, I’m not sure what Kim Jong Un would be doing in the middle east… That would definitely be an interesting one but, that at least applies to Stalin too, it didn’t last long, but Stalin absolutely steamrolled Iran there for a bit.
If you wanna know “what would happen” to central-asian countries under soviet rule, you can, well, look at central-asian countries under soviet rule, such as Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan, lightyears away in terms of progress from other central-asian countries with a history of western colonialism like Pakistan.
I’m not. I’m saying both are bad. The others mass murder too. Choosing them out of spite for the first is wishing a similar mass death on someone else. You’d be as guilty of those deaths as liberal voters are for yours.
So if I understand correctly, all 2.5 million in Gaza over 40% children deserve to be slaughtered in the most cruel way possible? Did you even watch the doctor’s testimony?
Edit: Also no one is asking you to vote for Hamas. Hamas is not on the ballot. And despite the pinkwashing Israel is a fascist racist country.
Oh I will absolutely denounce Israeli wartime tactics as excessive, as well as call their settlements illegal. The question is whether you will likewise denounce Hamas as terrorists, or will you lift them up as freedom fighters?
The folks on the top bombed the middle east, and killed a lot of people.
As someone who lives there, the choice is an easy one.
And the Soviets invaded Afghanistan with flowers and love, right??
The Soviets invaded Afghanistan, a bordering country, after the USA had armed radical theocratic militias with modern weapons. And whatever they did in Afghanistan pales in comparison with US actions in non-neighboring Vietnam. If you want to see the true impact of the USSR in central-asian countries vs that of the west, why don’t you compare the Human Development Index of Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan (ex-Soviet republics) to that of Pakistan (ex-English colony).
It’s not a “whose worse” competition, but you tankies can’t seem to accept that countries other than the us also do and did bad shit. It’s all whataboutism with you.
Nobody in this thread is denying what the us has done, nor celebrating it. But keep on telling us what a nice guy Stalin was!
There we go, the generic word to refer to everyone who doesn’t uncritically peddle anti-communist discourse.
I’m not a Stalinist. The great terror was terrible, unjustified, and overall a disaster. The collectivisation policy led to chaos and hunger. The democratic functioning of Soviets was seriously undermined. It’s just, as much as you probably don’t consider that the whole existence of the UK as a country is illegitimate as a consequence of its colonialist history, I don’t consider that the USSR as a whole should have been dismantled, and I consider that its overall impact on the world was positive, especially comparing it to what was before and to what came after.
Soviet Union fell decades ago. Israel is comitting mass murder with America’s blessing right now.
No no you’re right, America bad, Russia China good!
And Russia invaded Ukraine with flowers and love, right?
Far as I know Putin didn’t invade Ukraine because of the Soviet Union, is mostly because he’s a little shit.
Two ex-Soviet countries are fighting about how to split the inheritance. Hardly suprising.
i mean afghani society was better off before the us swooped in to destroy it after the soviet era
can’t have all that progress around that much oil
The US swooped in to destroy Afghanistan after the Soviet era.
Afghanistan having strategic value because of oil.
Jesus Christ.
And people wonder why I don’t treat tankie history takes seriously.
EDIT: No, no, please, downvoters, inform me as to the history of Afghanistan’s booming oil industry.
No one said it was due to a booming oil industry, but it was because of oil, I’m not sure how you’re not aware of this.
Reporting at the time: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/23/afghanistan.terrorism11
Huh, it’s almost like “BUT MUH OIL” has been an easy refrain of people with a simplified view of world politics for decades now, even when it’s not actually relevant
The article doesn’t really dismiss the argument even if the initial paragraphs make it seem like it, it just concludes that it seems unlikely to reach a point where the US could leverage the influence on a future local government, which is true but does not exclude/invalidate the previous proposition
oh yeah the us destroyed the middle east and former socialist countries for democracy, my bad.
So you’re doubling down on oil in Afghanistan?
reread the post you are responding to
No u
Well, how else could the Taliban have made so much societal progress?
those terrorist organizations are usually funded by the us…
That’s only because you know nothing about the history of the others, and they gave even less of a shit back then.
Istanbul wasn’t “bombed” since Mehmet the 2nd and turkey is doing the same with the Kurds right now. So…
Edit: Holy shit. Going through your history made me want to take a shower.
whatever makes you feel better after supporting mass murder.
Ah! And the folks on bottom?
Do you really have to pick one side out of these two?
And if you lived in Tibet, Taiwan, Korea, etc, you’d probably not be super into the folks on the bottom.
Who said anything about a choice?
I’m not sure if you could apply to all of them… because, I’m not sure what Kim Jong Un would be doing in the middle east… That would definitely be an interesting one but, that at least applies to Stalin too, it didn’t last long, but Stalin absolutely steamrolled Iran there for a bit.
If you wanna know “what would happen” to central-asian countries under soviet rule, you can, well, look at central-asian countries under soviet rule, such as Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan, lightyears away in terms of progress from other central-asian countries with a history of western colonialism like Pakistan.
They both killed a lot of people. Choose neither. Don’t wish that death upon strangers.
The only country actually running over people with tanks is Israel and does it with the unconditional support of the US
Liberals as always don’t see Arabs as people. Don’t you dare come asking for our votes.
I’m not. I’m saying both are bad. The others mass murder too. Choosing them out of spite for the first is wishing a similar mass death on someone else. You’d be as guilty of those deaths as liberal voters are for yours.
And Hamas doesn’t see LGBT people as people. Liberals don’t want to murder me for the way I was created.
So if I understand correctly, all 2.5 million in Gaza over 40% children deserve to be slaughtered in the most cruel way possible? Did you even watch the doctor’s testimony?
Edit: Also no one is asking you to vote for Hamas. Hamas is not on the ballot. And despite the pinkwashing Israel is a fascist racist country.
Oh I will absolutely denounce Israeli wartime tactics as excessive, as well as call their settlements illegal. The question is whether you will likewise denounce Hamas as terrorists, or will you lift them up as freedom fighters?
Vote for who you want just don’t pretend your helping yourself or anyone else
Right back at ya
How very republican of you.
I’m not am American. How can I be a Republican?
By only caring of things when they affect you.
I could say the same about you. Do you care about the mass murders Obama and Biden has comitted?
Solidarity forever