The numbers of American soldiers involved with the White Army and other attempts to reverse the Russian revolution were small and largely confined to supplies and logistics. Stalin was guilty of classic "mirror imaging," a phenomena wherein you imagine your enemy is thinking and behaving the way you would in their shoes. America was not Russia's enemy and had no real desire to be so until it became clear Stalin was intent on attempting extend his zone of influence as far as the West would let him.
Due to my post count i can't post links so just add the h t t p://w ww before my links. So if you don't like the Obama administraion (or bush,clinton,etc) that means that all of the US and it's people are a piece of shit? There is a government then there is it's people. .armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat United States: -5,113 active and inactive nuclear warheads and approximately 4,500 warheads retired and awaiting dismantlement. - The 5,113 active and inactive nuclear warhead stockpile includes - 1,968 strategic warheads - approximately 500 operational tactical weapons - approximately 2,645 inactive warheads Russia: - Approximately 2,600 operational strategic warheads - approximately 2,000 operational tactical warheads - approximately 8,000 stockpiled strategic and tactical warheads. The US is the largest arms supplier on the planet. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest_arms_exporters "stop selling weapons to terrorists and Islamic radicals" lol you got to be joking? Like supporting Prime Ministers similar to Thaci in Kosovo who is in charge of a Organized Crime Syndicate that run Human Organ Harvesting Rings along with Heroin, Sexual Slavery, and Arms dealing? .dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1338766/Kosovos-PM-Hashim-Tha-mafia-boss-stole-human-organs-Serbs.htm "Damningly, the report accuses Western governments of complicity, saying European leaders knew about, but chose to ignore, Thaci’s alleged brutality" .huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/14/hashim-thaci-kosovo-prime_n_796654.html "In confidential reports spanning more than a decade, agencies dedicated to combating drug smuggling in at least five countries have named Hashim Thaçi and other members of his Drenica Group as having exerted violent control over the trade in heroin and other narcotics." Not to mention creating and supporting the creation of Muslim Nations in the heart of South Eastern Europe. Or like they did in Afghanistan while funding and training Terrorists like the Taliban, Mujahadeen, and your beloved Osama? Whoops.
Really, exactly what did he do for the Russian people that was so great? I do not mean this as a angry question but only a honest question that I'd like to understand more about. I've never heard of him doing very much from any news source so perhaps you could provide links as well to show us what his accomplishments were.
As for the Original Post and Poster. Read up on Polish-American Zbigniew Brzezinski he's been involved in the inner circle especially in regards to foreign affairs in Eurasia since the Carter Administration. His book "The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives" is like a gospel for American stratagists when is comes to their objectives. Read up on PNAC (Project for a New American Century) too. American's Foreign Stratagy is based on it's needs, particularly energy. They say "Geography is Destiny" and in regards to the US that's very poignant. Since there is no possible way the US can fullfill it's energy needs with it's own natural resources it's parasidic in nature and has to aquire it's needs through others. Controlling the natural resources of other Nations along with political influence within certian regional spheres that have an abundance of these resources is their #1 concern and motivation behind virtually everything. They've done a good job (from an American perspective) in controlling the Middle East and now Eurasia is viewed by them as the #1 priority heading into the new century. Diminishing Russian influence in the region and isolating them along with the eventual hopes of "Balkanizing" Russia the same way they did in Yugoslavia and now Iraq are the basic goals. Balkanization would be their ultimate aim and it's achieved by fueling tensions along Ethnic and Religious lines to break apart the country. Brzezinski's dream is to have Russia return to it's boarders as it existed in mid 16th Century Muscovy Getting Political influence and bulding military bases in Central Asian Republics. The Baku Pipeline and the Oil in and around the Caspian Sea make Central Asia, the Caucases, and Turkey important areas. Colour Revolution Coups via NGO's like "the National Endowment for Democracy" and "Freedom House" which are affiliated with US Foreign stratagists like Soros acting as the bankroll are all efforts to try and gain and increased presence in the region to aquire as much control over the resources as possible. Russia has a wealth of Oil and Natural gas along with it's neigbours in the region and it's that Nation's life blood (as it is for any nations with their natural resources) and because of the US's need to exploit and feast off others in order to sustain itself this ensures their rivalry.
Due to my post count i can't post links so just add the h t t p://w ww before my links. Below are some links largely discussion his economic achievements which are rather significant. One of the larger or favourite things in alot of peoples minds, certianly for me, is his taking back control from the Oligarchs like Boris Berezovsky, Vladimir Gusinsky, & Mikhail Khodorkovsky who essential ran the country (into the ground i might add) during that drunk degenerate Yeltsin's reign. Also the only time when Russia was portrayed in a good light in US media was during Yeltsin's era since the West was happy as could be with the pillaging of Russia's resources and it's decrepit existance under his rule. Due to this i really don't think many Americans realize how truly horrendous life was in the 1990's for the average Russian before Putin came to power and how broken, corrupt, poor and decrepid the country was. Putin's approval ratings during his 8 years were always ranging between the mid 70's to low 80's during his terms. He was TIME magazine Man Of The Year in 2008. .cdi.org/russia/johnson/2008-45-27.cfm .washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/04/AR2007120402218.html //english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/6365190.html "Putin has also managed to achieve remarkable economic improvement, registering an around 7 percent annual economic growth from 2000 to 2007, making the country one of the world's top ten economies and a member of what is called the Golden BRICs, a group of prominent emerging markets including Brazil, Russia, India and China. Putin's cabinet took a series of initiatives to boost the economy, such as including expanding investment, stimulating domestic consumption, optimizing industrial structure, encouraging exports of high-tech products, facilitating energy exports, cracking down on economic crime and underground economic activities, as well as improving fiscal, financial and tax systems. As a result, Russia's gross domestic product (GDP), a key indicator for economic performance, increased from 260 billion U.S. dollars in 2000 to 1,260 billion dollars last year. Foreign trade went up from 150 billion dollars in 2000 to 468 billion in 2006, accounting for half of the country's GDP, while foreign investment in Russia has totaled 198 billion dollars as of September 2007. Russia even paid off all Soviet-era debts and accumulated the world's third largest monetary reserves. Analysts, however, believe that a big stake of the oil-gas-rich country’s growth lays on the surging oil price, which quintupled from some 20 dollars per barrel to around 100 dollars during his two terms as president. Russia, the world's No. 1 gas exporter and No. 2 oil producer, is feeding one quarter of European gas markets and is still expanding its gas and oil pipelines network into the European and the Asia-Pacific region. It's even mulling to set up a gas OPEC, which has sparked concerns from major energy buyers such as Europe and the United States. Russia's military expenditure increased at an average rate of 30 percent since 2000 and will be quadrupled to 959 billion rubbles (some 39 billion U.S. dollars) in 2008, accounting for some 16 percent of the national GDP, official figures showed."
Churchill gave them that land. He so states. There were a number of other issues as well. You might want to review that in a little more detail. I think you're confusing Senator McCarthy with the House Un-American Activities Committee (the Big Clues are high-lighted). I don't doubt them at all, but then I know and understand the difference between nuclear stock-pile and nuclear forces. His Most Majestic Preeminent Excellency On-High, Doctor Carl Sagan was an excellent propagandist who misled people with his constant references to US nuclear stock-piles in order to needlessly frighten them. He forgot to tell people that (at that particular time) the Corporal and Sergeant warheads in the nuclear stock-pile were totally useless because the missiles had been destroyed, and the launchers used to transport and erect the missiles for launch had been long since removed from inventory and either scrapped or sold. So the only way to deliver a Corporal warhead to target was to tie it down to the roof of an AMC Pacer and drive it there (of course even that wouldn't work unless you could figure out how to defeat the PAL system). But that assumes you still have the delivery system. I'd have to look to be sure, but the US stock-pile used to have [gravity] bombs that could only be delivered by the B-52 or B-58. The B-58s have been non-existent for decades, and the B-52, that was an F-series, so I'm not even sure the G or H series could carry them. I suppose you could remove the rotating cylinder (that is used to launch cruise missiles). They've stream-lined it. They have enough silo and mobile launched ICBMs, plus SLBMs to defend themselves. Their tactical arsenal is mostly neutron warheads delivered by SRBMs and attack aircraft. That's really all they need. And the US doesn't. Excuse me, but who was illegally buying arms from Iran to ship to Albania so that al-Qaida #2 man al-Zawahari could smuggle them into Kosovo-Metohija? Oh, that was Bill Clinton. I guess you missed neo-con Tony Lake's Senate confirmation hearings for the CIA Director position. No, Tony didn't get confirmed, because he and Bill were illegally buying weapons from Iran. That's like the pot calling the kettle black. Both are the US' own fault. In the case of Korea, the US should have finished what it started (and the US did start the Korean War -- Syngman Rhee said so himself in an Newsweek interview in 1956). In the case of Iran, Carter should have listened to Bill Smith and Al Haig, and rolled out the red carpet for Khomeini, especially since Smith had been negotiating with him for the last 14 months or so, well, ever since the Shah told Smith he was going to abdicate. Sending General Hugyens to Iran to convince the military to take over the country was a huge mistake (even more so since Hugyens was an air force officer and not an army officer). The US. It was a prudent action by the Soviets to create a buffer zone to protect Russia. It's a little more complicated than that. Patton was right. Even with the Soviets in Berlin, the US could have attacked the Soviets and that war would have ended in 45-60 days, maybe 90 days, without the use of nuclear weapons.
Since you're speaking as an outsider (calling Americans "you" instead of "us"), I assume you are not American. Well don't worry- we will sort out our problems. You should watch the movie "War Games". It has a super-computer called WOPR that all it does is play imaginary war a million different ways against a million different scenarios. WOPR is real. Maybe it's not called WOPR but we have plans to do anything and everything in the world and together, along with the CIA, they can enact any plan within hours. So don't worry- America is not going anywhere soon. As far as our currency, we did a miraculous job of rebounding in the past 6 months to a year. We don't see it now because we're still in it but we rebounded. It'll be clear a year-plus from now. And our National Debt is something we are well aware of. That's why Obama has a red phone- it's connected to China and he's always "away" when they call- ha! Numbers on paper, that's all it is. Our 2008 bailout proved that we are a closed economic system made of many aspects all working as one towards the goal of mutual self-sufficiency. It'll be a sad day when the American dollar becomes worthless- because 1.3rd of the world's cash reserves will go bust. Too big to fail? You betcha! The one thing I will give you is that we shouldn't have up to 1,000 overseas military bases. 200-400 should be enough. That plus our aircraft carriers, stealth nuclear bombers and God-knows what else we have puts the-bodies-on-the-floor ANYWHERE within 24 hours.
Yes- EVERY SINGLE THING in that store was brought in by gas-powered trucks. I ran some simulations and at worst, gas will cost $6.00 a gallon, bottom line should OPEC cut us off again. This will make everything in the store 20% more expensive, which devalues the US dollar 20% to which minimum wage will have to be increased 21% for it to equal out. Of course the dollar takes a hit but it only means the finite number of dollars China and Japan holds (albeit in the trillions) is easily paid off with a weaker dollar. As of 2015, I would declare Opec has reached peak oil- for us Americans at least- and by 2030 we won't get any from them. Europe and China will be getting it all. This gives us 20 years to re-establish the Monroe Doctrine of authority over the Americas... to get our petrolium from local sources on this side of the world. With a target of $6.00 gas, the tar-sands of Canada are again a profitable venture. So is deepsea drilling. And Uncle Bob's backyard drill in Texas that produces 2 barrels a day is enough to keep Uncle Bob in business as an oil-man. We need to get off OPEC oil within 20 years and 66% off oil within 50 years.
how could churchill give away what wasn't his. and I think you mean Rossevelt. churchill actually wanted to send troops east into poland to ensure it would become a puppet state.
Russia has the same problem Canada does- too much land and not enough of it is livable: they are too far north. As such, Canada is as big as the USA but only has 1/10th the population... the rest is "the great unexplored north". Russia is double the size of the USA with half the population... this means on average there's 75% less people per square mile. They have 20 cities with populations from 1.5 million to 600,000... you could fit all 20 of them within New York State. Russia is full of miles and miles of unknown lands criss-crossed by railroad lines that loosely hold it together. I would propose a weak Federal Government with strong states within- to develop infrastructure... the double the population in the next 100 years. America is bleeding dollars and oil but Russia is bleeding people, and with less people you have less everything. People in Russia need to have more children. I am torn because I am Russian by decent but I am firmly an American. I want to see Russia do better in the right way- to increase population, city size and overall well-being within Russia. Russia is in no position to posture against America anymore. At least we have roads, as decreped as they are. Russia needs to rebuild itself again to an empire... falling apart is not an option. Russia needs to sell its oil reserves as much as we need the oil, as much as they need US dollars.
A few 100 Million Eastern Europeans are still asking the same question, since no one elected Churchill or appointed him to represent them. It's even more appalling, because Churchill condemned Hitler and Stalin for dividing up Europe, and then Churchill turned around and did the exact same thing Hitler did. Churchill's penchant for map-making is well known. Kuwait exists because the Scotch-swilling fat slob farted while drawing the lines on the map for Iraq (and no the people in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan did not appointed or elected Churchill to divide up the Ottoman Empire after WW I, and the peoples living in Iraq did not appoint Churchill to choose their king -- and Churchill insulted the many peoples of Iraq by putting a Saud, namely King Faisal from Saudi Arabia in charge of Iraq). So, no, that wasn't the first time Churchill played map-maker. And you can't claim Soviet troops were already there, because Churchill gave away Poland the first in 1943, before D-Day (and without consulting the Polish government-in-exile or FDR).
Russia and U.S. are enemies since October 1917 until 1985-1991. They were temporary allies against fascism. Now they are "enemies" only because of inertia. But they aren't more "enemies" than France or Germany or general countries where they do not speak English.
The USSR was only a tentative ally in WWII, we were suspicious of them all along, since they were making pacts with Hitler. It was especially troubling when they ended up taking control over half of Eastern Europe. The degree that they murdered people they considered their political enemies was exceeded only by Germany. They starved to death millions of Ukrainians, and they weren't very nice to the Jews either.
