Am I Crazy For Missing The Cold War...?

General General Discussion
1

Maybe it’s just nostalgia or an old person’s “things were better back when…” kinda thing, but I think the whole “US vs. USSR” thing made the world a better place. Sure we coulda suffered nuclear armageddon at a moments notice but generally both sides were sane enough to wish to avoid that outcome and generally responsible enough to prevent it from happening “by accident.”

Also meant we were concerned about being the “good guy”, and by comparison showing them as the “bad guy” so generally we didn’t accept too much corruption from our leaders, though it did happen of course.

Also with us trying to secure ourselves and NATO from “communist aggression” we didn’t waste a lot of money on wars of ideology and money flushing socialist programs. We had them of course, and a war on drugs, etc. but they didn’t get the same kind of tax dollars they do today.

Commies and socialists were in the closet. The Russians were the bad guys and so was their system of government. It wasn’t McCarthyism during the 70s and 80s but the socialists in government knew they had to tread lightly.

Terrorism was events like Munich, radicals like Baader Meinhoff and a few plane hijackings. Nobody dreamed of shit like the USS Cole as people feared the US and their response. Events like the Ft Hood shooting would have been impossible.

The Russians of course did horrible things like shooting down KAL 007 but compared to 9-11 that is almost nothing, unless of course you were on KAL 007 or knew somebody who was. Not trying to diminish it, just make a point. And of course the Russians invaded Afghanistan, do you think we can give it back to them?

Because we couldn’t afford to appear weak to the USSR when dipshits from Arab crap holes like Quaddafy Duck from Libya threatened us we bombed the shit out fo them and taught them to address us in a respectful manner. Leaders of other arab states paid attention.

We had American heroes like Rambo, John T. Booker/Col. James Braddock and even Chevy Chase and Dan Akroyd were with the good guys in “Spies Like Us.” We didn’t have to suffer too many dipshits like Jake Gyllenhaal in “Jarhead” and Michael Moore wouldn’t have stood a chance. Bill Maher knew his place and kept his ass in the Avocado Jungle.

We of course forgave the Germans and Japanese and helped restore their countries after WWII and even helped build their economies. But we didn’t kiss their damn ass during the war and weren’t afraid to call a Nazi a Nazi and we didn’t have a “hands off” policy when it came to Shinto temples. And we sure as hell didn’t put the lives of US soldiers at risk in order to prevent civilian casualties in Europe.

Granted we fought Vietnam with our hands tied behind our backs with much of the population cheering for the enemy so maybe things weren’t perfect then either. Thankfully that sort of crap wasn’t quite as prevalent during the 80s.

2

I kinda miss the CW, but really dig going to Hungary, Czech Republic and Romania on holiday and chattin up the ladies there :cool::cool::cool:

3

sure, Iran Contra, selling chemical weapons to Saddam, funding the mujaheddin in Afghanistan, none of those things were too bad were they :rolleyes:

Yea, Vietnam was nothing right?

Guess you forgot about Beirut and the bombing of the Marine base there?

The 70s and 80s gave us the problems we’re dealing with today regarding the economy, terrorism, trade deficits, etc.

4

You can not compare wars and what happened during them. Simply because of the news coverage and what the public was feed are nothing the same. Just look at when people started freaking out about Vietnam, when they started seeing babies burned by napalm on tv and in print. If everyone had a tv and internet during WW2 and saw what was actually going on it would have been the same, people do not want to see war or what happens during it.

As for Rambo, well that was as the cold war was ending, and most action movies after continued to use the Russians and every other country in the news as the enemy well after the cold war ended. Rambo was also showing how Vietnam vets were being treated like garbage long after the war.

5

Vietnam was winnable militarily. We “lost” because of how soft America came, and we will lose future wars because of it again and again until something so massive happens the gloves come off. We were at risk of doing the same thing with Iraq and Afghanistan by electing soft leadership.

Beirut and USS Cole are not comparable.

Never heard of the saying an enemy of my enemy is my friend?

6

i was referring to the OPs statement of wasting money on wars of ideology.

Why not? Both suicide attacks by radical Muslims. Both on U.S. military abroad.

Yes, but we never seem to learn that enemy of our enemy generally turns out to be our enemy sooner or later. Selling weapons and training to Iraq and Afghanistan turned out to be a great idea didn’t it? :rolleyes:

7

Fighting communism isn’t exactly a war of ideology. Its a long term strategic effort…if we just turned a blind eye to communism taking over the world sooner or later we would be the lone duck sitting in a pool full of sharks. It was better to stomp it out instead of waiting until commie hoards really were running over the world.

Terrorism and fighting a war with what you have are not the same.

Yes Afghanistan turned out the way we wanted it to. Has little to do with what happened in Afghanistan after the Russians left. And least you forget it was those evil Muji’s who worked with our SF in 2002/2003 to push the Taliban out of power? Not every mujihideen is “bad”.

We should have taken Saddam out in 1991. We had a lot more troops, and it would have been far easier in 91 than 03. Another example of our softness get in the way of doing what was militarily possible and what would have been better for us in the long run.

8

This is kind of a silly post lol.

Being itness to it from the other side of the Iron Curtain… its really silly. lol

I still believe that the US made a huge mistake in helping Mujaheddin. This rediculous fear of communism and the US’s McCarthy-istic responce to it was stupid. Honestly, who gives a sh*t if Afghanastan became communist? The soviets were trying to help out a weak Commi government in the country and the US supported those who would later come to hate the US most. Gave them weapons, sholder launched missles, tought them to make bombs. “Now we can go out and get those reds cause the only good commi is one thats dead”

The US then needlesly layed down over 50K men in Vietnam, and for what? The country turned out communist in the end, did the world end? No. So what terrible things would have happend if we simply said “f*ck it” Nothing.

Communism would have run its cource as it just about it. Some would have gone communist, but only the countries that were of no consequence to the US either way. US Allies in Western Europe would not have gone commi, there was no need to. Only 3rd world countries would have done so, and at that point, who cares.

But no, the US had to fight the reds at every corner out of some stupid fear that communism would come to the US.

And 60 years later, with all those men dead, we are closer to a socialist way of live then ever.

What a waste! :rolleyes:

9

While I like the OP, he may have stepped into it a bit here I agree. Too simplistic.

However, if we translate his post into: “The world is more fucked up now than ever.”, then there may be validity to his words after all.

10

Wolverines!

11

fighting communism is the textbook definition of a war of ideology. communism is an ideology, hence fighting a war against communism is a war of ideology.

terrorism is the new communism.

then why are we there now?

and please, I’m anxiously waiting your explanation on how the embassy bombing in Beirut is not comparable to the USS Cole attack.

12

Don’t forget Korea, or how close we came to the end during the Cuban missile crisis. I fail to see a difference between the marine barracks and the USS Cole. And even if you talk about the Embassies getting blown up in Africa at the very end of the cold war, you still have to compare it with the Iranian Hostage situation at the end of the 70’s.

Why include the treatment of enemies during WWII in the analysis? that wasn’t cold war behaviour. Sure we were willing to call them Japs, and Huns, and guidos. We were also willing to erect prison camps and stow away Americans that shared the same ethnic back ground.

I think the main difference is that the soviets were speaking for a position of Power. Atomic might meant they could afford to talk a big game and not blow everyone up to prove a point. You’ll never see UBL on the floor of the UN slapping his sandal on the podium telling us he is going to bury us.

The only tool the enemy has right now is blood.

Best thing to come out of the Cold war is the space program. It was an economic and technological war. This one doesn’t look all that different than Alexanders march to the Indus river.

13

selling chemical weapons to Saddam,

A lie repeated often does not make it true.

14

Really, we didn’t sell weapons to Saddam? The same weapons he turned around and killed innocent people with?

http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1991/C231.html

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

http://www.counterpunch.org/boles1010.html

http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/arming_iraq.php

15

The only thing good about the Cold War was that there was a sense of stability or predictability in the world. We all feared the threat of Nuclear War (MAD). During the CW the world was split into two. The two Super powers fought each other via proxies and trying to strategically out maneuver each other. Unfortunately for the US this lead to us compromising our principles at times. From supporting Dictators simply because they were anti communists. Supplying arms to what we deemed a lesser of two evils. Circumventing US law to support anti communist proxies. Selling out Democratic principles in order to support the colonial establishments of our Allies. Whatever position the Soviets took, we took the opposite position. Many times we never really thought out the long term repercussions. Many believe we won the CW. Some theorize that our enemy just transformed (morphed) itself into something new. While the US expends its resources on low intensity conflicts around the globe, we transform our military strategy and tactics accordantly. Meanwhile a larger enemy lays in waiting, to take advantage at a later time of their choosing. Thats my two cents.

16

That I can agree with 100%.

By the time I started school in the USSR it was already the late 80’s and tentioned had eased, so I was not tought about the great imperialistic evil that is the US. But my parents were lol.

Either way, we knew who the enemy was, and you guys in the US back then knew as well.

If sh*t was going to go down, we all could expect the direction it would fall from.

Now, no one knows…

17

We sold limited weapons to him during the Iran/Iraq war. Most of what he got came from Teh Soviet Union and France.

We sold no, I repeat no chemical weapons to Iraq.

If you really plan on becoming a Navy Seal, I recommend you stop recieving your talking points from the Daily Kos and Democrat Underground.

Again, repeating a lie will not magically turn it in to the truth thru increment.

18

I tend to agree. Seems like it was more of an economic strategy than anything else.

19

thats why people say the US won… cause the Soviet Union went bankrupt lol

20

Aside from the fact that you contradict yourself, it seems that your understanding of the cold war is rather simplistic.

Do you really think being “on the other” side, you got a more objective sense of the struggle than we did?