User Tag List

First 51314151617 Last

Results 141 to 150 of 182

  1. #141
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Members Only View Post
    I have seen statements from Nicaragua claiming the opposite, I have also seen a comparison of statistics on the living standards under both parties, which came out in favor of the Sandinistas. However, It would be realistically impossible for any of us to claim with 100% accuracy either way which group would have been "better".

    I'll also add that judging life under the Sandinista government would be a reasonably hard thing to do, considering for the majority of their tenure they were subject to US sanctions and a major terrorist campaign; a fair portion of which was even blamed on the Sandinistas themselves, by the way of false flag attacks orchestrated by the CIA.
    The Sandinistas were responsible for TONS of atrocities. It is not "reasonably hard" to judge them for political murders, torture, shutting down opposition media outlets, et al. In the aggregate, they were bad people. Very bad.


    And nor am I excusing Soviet behavior, It is not a competition. I'm really not interested in determining which countries had it "worse" considering nearly all of the western/eastern satellite states had it very bad; I'd say it's a fairly irrelevant discussion. The West is not the guiding moral light of the world, in the same way the East is not a barbarian hoard chomping at the bit to destroy all our morally perfect western domains. Both sides acted completely unethical in many situations, and both were no worse, or better than each other... and still are to this day.
    I disagree here, too. Both sides certainly did awful things to client states during the Cold War, but you are implicitly equating the morality of liberal democracy and capitalism with authoritarian communism. They are not morally equivalent. Communism, fascism, National Socialism, Juche, whatever are both inefficient AND wrong. If we learned nothing else from the 20th-Century, we know that much. It's awful that so many lives were lost on both side trying to prove it, but we can't pretend as if everything was just one maniac bloodletting with no ideas and principles involved.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  2. #142
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Members Only View Post
    The West is not the guiding moral light of the world, in the same way the East is not a barbarian hoard chomping at the bit to destroy all our morally perfect western domains. Both sides acted completely unethical in many situations, and both were no worse, or better than each other... and still are to this day.
    That logic only applies if you consider authoritarian systems to be morally equivalent to liberal democracies. Whatever means were used during the Cold War (I recall that we allied with the USSR under Stalin to defeat the Nazis in WWII, which frankly was a lot worse than anything we did during the Cold War-it was also necessary if one accepts the premise that the Axis powers had to be defeated), it remains the case that American victory was geared toward the protection of liberal democracy while the USSR sought to export Communism. There is no moral equivalency between the two sides overall.

    Here and now, the NATO countries and prospective members are attempting to institute and maintain democratic institutions and relative sovereignty, while Russia is an authoritarian state with aggressive imperial ambitions attempting to impose its will on neighboring states-and that will includes puppet authoritarian governments rather than liberal democracy. No one is claiming that the West is blameless, but attributing moral equivalency between the two sides is erroneous.

    Edit: And before some sophist tries to put words into my mouth, I think allying with the Stalinist Soviet Union during WWII was necessary to defeat a greater threat and a (marginally) greater evil.

  3. #143
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    That logic only applies if you consider authoritarian systems to be morally equivalent to liberal democracies. Whatever means were used during the Cold War (I recall that we allied with the USSR under Stalin to defeat the Nazis in WWII, which frankly was a lot worse than anything we did during the Cold War-it was also necessary if one accepts the premise that the Axis powers had to be defeated), it remains the case that American victory was geared toward the protection of liberal democracy while the USSR sought to export Communism. There is no moral equivalency between the two sides overall.

    Here and now, the NATO countries and prospective members are attempting to institute and maintain democratic institutions and relative sovereignty, while Russia is an authoritarian state with aggressive imperial ambitions attempting to impose its will on neighboring states-and that will includes puppet authoritarian governments rather than liberal democracy. No one is claiming that the West is blameless, but attributing moral equivalency between the two sides is erroneous.
    PERSONAL JINX! You owe me a Coke!
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  4. #144
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    PERSONAL JINX! You owe me a Coke!
    Great minds think alike...and so do ours.

  5. #145
    will make your day Carebear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    1,449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    That logic only applies if you consider authoritarian systems to be morally equivalent to liberal democracies. Whatever means were used during the Cold War (I recall that we allied with the USSR under Stalin to defeat the Nazis in WWII, which frankly was a lot worse than anything we did during the Cold War-it was also necessary if one accepts the premise that the Axis powers had to be defeated), it remains the case that American victory was geared toward the protection of liberal democracy while the USSR sought to export Communism. There is no moral equivalency between the two sides overall.
    They still look very similar from the outside. I agree the USSR was worse than the US, but both sides did anything to protect AND export their ideologies and more importantly; their influence.

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Here and now, the NATO countries and prospective members are attempting to institute and maintain democratic institutions and relative sovereignty, while Russia is an authoritarian state with aggressive imperial ambitions attempting to impose its will on neighboring states-and that will includes puppet authoritarian governments rather than liberal democracy. No one is claiming that the West is blameless, but attributing moral equivalency between the two sides is erroneous.
    Ok, this debate is basically hopeless. We see totally different motives. One side sees two imperialist powers (one authoritarian, one less so, but still moving in that direction) fighting for the greatest influence, the other seems to be seeing "good" vs. "bad" where the good side sometimes have to make compromises to achieve the greater good.

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Edit: And before some sophist tries to put words into my mouth, I think allying with the Stalinist Soviet Union during WWII was necessary to defeat a greater threat and a (marginally) greater evil.
    I have arms for a fucking reaosn, so come hold me. Then we'll fuvk! Whoooooh! - GZA

  6. #146
    Senior Member Members Only's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    That logic only applies if you consider authoritarian systems to be morally equivalent to liberal democracies. Whatever means were used during the Cold War (I recall that we allied with the USSR under Stalin to defeat the Nazis in WWII, which frankly was a lot worse than anything we did during the Cold War-it was also necessary if one accepts the premise that the Axis powers had to be defeated), it remains the case that American victory was geared toward the protection of liberal democracy while the USSR sought to export Communism. There is no moral equivalency between the two sides overall.

    Here and now, the NATO countries and prospective members are attempting to institute and maintain democratic institutions and relative sovereignty, while Russia is an authoritarian state with aggressive imperial ambitions attempting to impose its will on neighboring states-and that will includes puppet authoritarian governments rather than liberal democracy. No one is claiming that the West is blameless, but attributing moral equivalency between the two sides is erroneous.
    So you would say the US governments involvement in World War 2 was geared toward the protection of Liberal Democracy, more than it was geared towards economic and geopolitical aims?

    Yes, I would say there is no moral equivalency between the two sides, because the very phrase itself "Moral Equivalency" is designed inherently to protect murderous foreign policies; it is a meaningless phrase. The only equivalency between the two sides I see is that neither side are "moral", and yet both stake a claim to it. Moral Equivalency is simply a phrase that when stripped down, can basically amount to "Well I might have held 10 people hostage and killed 20, but you held 20 people hostage and killed 40".

    Sure we might have more freedom now (In our own states) than the Russians, and given the choice I "would" have preferred to have lived in the US or the UK over the Soviet Union, however that does not also make me blind to the Wests many, many sins. But then we get into the issue of the "Important People" (IE Westerners) and the "Unimportant People" (IE South Americans etc...) which is another debate entirely.

    NATO is trying to institute "Democratic Institutions"? Such as the South American examples I provided? You can vote as long as you vote for "OUR" candidate, does that sound like democracy to you? You then include the use of "Puppet Authoritarian Governments"? Do I even need to list the amount of times the west has supported, and instituted Puppet Authoritarian Governments? The West is no stranger to this at all.

    In fact, Relative to this thread: Georgias goverment was a puppet goverment: a US puppet goverment. The Wall Street Journal in 2003 explicitly credited the toppling of Shevardnadze's regime to the operations of "a raft of 'non-governmental' organizations . . . supported by American and other Western foundations." Saakashvili's goverment was very much the classic puppet goverment, just for the "good" guys.

    Everything you claimed about Russia in that last paragraph could just as easily be attributed to many Western states. This is without even mentioning how this conflict was started: it was not started by Russia.
    It's just a ride

  7. #147
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    I'd like a response to my post, if possible, since I didn't really get into WWII (which was not that great a war, really) and I am not a fan of NATO or U.S. hegemony.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  8. #148
    Senior Member Members Only's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    107

    Default

    Oh, Sorry, I didn't even see your post, ahhaa, one sec. I just thought you had posted something about Coke.
    It's just a ride

  9. #149
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Members Only View Post
    Oh, Sorry, I didn't even see your post, ahhaa, one sec. I just thought you had posted something about Coke.
    Sure, no problem. I really am NOT taking a neocon (or even RAH RAH! AMERICA!) position. I just honestly think that communism is/was SO bad that it really cannot compared to free market capitalism (contrasted, yes; compared, no). I wouldn't even argue that the U.S. is a truly capitalist country in this day and age, either. That is partly due to what our leaders consider is necessary to maintain hegemony, which I find appalling.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  10. #150
    Strongly Ambivalent Ivy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    24,060

    Default

    Hey, where are the personal attacks? Don't make my popcorn popping have been in vain, people!

    (Srsly that's my way of saying thanks for showing that a political debate CAN be both passionate and civil.)

    (I'll feel really bad if I've missed a personal attack in this thread.)
    The one who buggers a fire burns his penis
    -anonymous graffiti in the basilica at Pompeii

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 370
    Last Post: 02-07-2016, 09:54 PM
  2. What is the craziest bit of technology you have read about in SF?
    By macjoven in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-14-2009, 08:15 PM
  3. What's the deal with Socionics?
    By alicia91 in forum Socionics
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-02-2008, 08:56 AM
  4. What is the best country to live in?
    By JAVO in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 04-28-2008, 05:44 AM
  5. What's the deal with Water Divining?
    By JivinJeffJones in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 01-09-2008, 01:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO