On US conduct during the Cold War - Page 8 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

Strider · #**106** (**permalink**) 04-24-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by enigma2

I answered the one point which I thought of any consequence. The rest was merely weak justification for the unjustifiable.

Oh come now, surely you can do better than that. Look, if you realize that you're out of your league, just acknowledge it, don't pretend you're not responding to me because you find it not worth dealing with. If it's such a weak justification, refuting it shouldn't be all that difficult for you.

I'm really curious to hear your response to these two questions, which I've helpfully reprinted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by strider

You've reduced the USSR to an essentially reactive role with no agenda of their own; why is that? What evidence do you base your idea that peaceful coexistence was ever a realistic option, even had the US desired it (which at least FDR most certainly did)?

enigma2 · #**107** (**permalink**) 04-24-2007

I didn't reduce the USSR to that role. I'm not saying that the USSR did not have an agenda, however, whatever this agenda may have been it was certainly more re-active than pro-active. Mainly due to the agenda energetically and militarily pursued by the USA. Firstly, the War of Intervention following the end of The Great War. Even after allying with the USSR during the Second World War, the plan formulated by US top military to invade the USSR immediately at the end of that war, when it was weakened, could have had a lot to do with the climate of hate and fear which defines that era.

As for peaceful coexistence, people from Los Angeles to Delhi to Melbourne to Wellington were calling for that policy to be implemented. There was also the huge Aldermarston anti-nuclear marches in the UK which gave us the round peace symbol. Picasso gave us another symbol of peace - the beautiful dove of peace with the olive branch in its beak.

What did the USA do? Well, it did several things, none of a peaceful nature One thing it did was to ask Churchill to make a speech. A speech now known as the 'Iron Curtain' speech.

FDR had the foresight to see that a world which had peace as its raison d'etre was the way forward. Unfortunately, foreign policy was high-jacked by the very people that Eisenhower warned about - the military-industrial complex; and its been setting the agenda ever since.

htperr6565 · #**108** (**permalink**) 04-25-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by enigma2

6565, it has nothing to do with being 'wise'. It has everything to do with having an open mind and of approaching a question with, at least, an understanding of the other person's worldview. For example, the other day I read a post of JP's on the 'welcome' thread. I have a certain liking for the man, although, at times,he can be exasperating. Unfortunately, his approach and understanding was so different to mine that it would take a lot of 'face to face' work to even reach an agreement to disagree.

I don't intend to go into such a deep and complex subject as the Cold War on this board with all that that entails. You are only studying it, *I* lived through it and the harm that period did to myself, my extended family, friends, acquaintances and the people of this planet should not be taken lightly. I will admit to having a great deal of trouble with an objective attitude towards that time.

Unfortunately,we are all still suffering the aftershocks.

I didn't come here, as you have stated - to change people's minds. I find that beyond my small talents. I have come here to find 'common ground' and a sense that we are all inhabiting this beautiful planet and should show our appreciation of that by doing the best we can to preserve it. I have been taught to not bother with what may divide us, but to look to what unites us.

It is obvious that you have come here to have a more confrontational experience.

oh i see. you only like to poke statements at people and then hide behind posts like that.
for example "htp, i doubt you have the analytical skills and objectivity to understand why"
is that not confrontational? that doesnt sound like someone looking for unification with fellow mankind.
what common ground can we find on this issue? i would be glad to make the attempt...

enigma2 · #**109** (**permalink**) 04-25-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by htperr6565

oh i see. you only like to poke statements at people and then hide behind posts like that.
for example "htp, i doubt you have the analytical skills and objectivity to understand why"
is that not confrontational? that doesnt sound like someone looking for unification with fellow mankind.
what common ground can we find on this issue? i would be glad to make the attempt...

6565, our common ground will have to wait. For the next week I'm going to be very busy entertaining a friend. Catch up about this time next week!

All the best!

htperr6565 · #**110** (**permalink**) 04-25-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by enigma2

6565, our common ground will have to wait. For the next week I'm going to be very busy entertaining a friend. Catch up about this time next week!

All the best!

looking forward to it. enjoy your time with your friend.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode