|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 11:13:09 AM
|
|
|
mapachito13
Posts: 2253
Joined: 10/1/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
An anti-missile site is a defensive site. As such, I can't see why the Russians would be upset except that we might intercept their missiles heading in our direction. And if that is the case, being in the Czech Republic, we probably couldn't react in time to incercept any of their missiles. Besides, we might actually intercept a missile or two headed toward our beloved Russian friends.
-Dave
quote:
ORIGINAL: TaoPoohBear
Other than promising to disarm our military (the drain in Iraq is doing that for them) your sarcasim actually has more merit than building anti-missle sites next door to them to protect against imaginary threats from Iran.
And flares and chaff are defensive systems on an offensive aircraft which also can be used for defense.
A defensive system coupled with an offensive system makes for a more effective attack. Military strategy 101.
_____________________________
Peace Sells....But Who's Buying!
"I would argue that the most serious threat to the United States is not someone hiding in a cave in Pakistan or Afghanistan, but our own fiscal irresponsibility."-David Walker, fmr comptroller general of the US
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 11:18:40 AM
|
|
|
blessedinnyc
Posts: 1812
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mapachito13
And flares and chaff are defensive systems on an offensive aircraft which also can be used for defense.
A defensive system coupled with an offensive system makes for a more effective attack. Military strategy 101.
Building on that, does Dave know what Mutually Assured Destruction means? It's basically the concept that prevented the use of nuclear weapons in the Cold War. Anti-missile missiles actually serve to undermine M.A.D.
Russia is worried that the US may gain the ability to launch a nuclear attack on Russia without having to worry about retaliation. Given that many people on this site believe Russia is going back to being the USSR, this may be a valid concern.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 11:23:31 AM
|
|
|
freakofnature
Posts: 759
Joined: 1/17/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
Given that many people on this site believe Russia is going back to being the USSR,
If it walks like a communist, talks like a communist it certainly isn't going to be a:
DUCK! Here comes the Cold War allover again!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 11:33:19 AM
|
|
|
SonInMe1
Posts: 3520
Joined: 4/16/2005
From: my mom by God
Status: offline
|
quote:
know what Mutually Assured Destruction means? It's basically the concept that prevented the use of nuclear weapons in the Cold War.
This is a misconception. What kept Russia from attacking us was their inability to do so.
Detente kept the cold war going. Russia's economic base could not support a true military and when we pushed, they caved. In reality, they were much less a threat than what was promoted.
Which brings me to my question...just how much of a threat is Russia today? They are still a thrid world economy. Why do we need a missle system, offensive or defensive, in the Chezck republic? I don't think Russia is a problem..are they?
_____________________________
You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.
James 4:4
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 11:42:42 AM
|
|
|
davemiller7
Posts: 825
Joined: 3/5/2008
From: NC via NY
Status: offline
|
Mutually Assured Destruction: wonderful concept! If that's the goal, why not just everybody blow ourselves up and get it over with. We mustn't try to gain the upper hand, that wouldn't be fair.
Answer this question, if you (or anyone else) can. If we are so bent on going to war with Russia, as some of you seem to think, why didn't we strike when the USSR had just collapsed and the region was in a state of total chaos, politically, militarily, and financially? Why are we waiting until Russia has somewhat gotten back on its feet? Is that part of the Mutually Assured Destruction philosophy? We want to give them a chance to blow us up too? That whole concept is absurd.
-Dave
quote:
ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc
quote:
ORIGINAL: mapachito13
And flares and chaff are defensive systems on an offensive aircraft which also can be used for defense.
A defensive system coupled with an offensive system makes for a more effective attack. Military strategy 101.
Building on that, does Dave know what Mutually Assured Destruction means? It's basically the concept that prevented the use of nuclear weapons in the Cold War. Anti-missile missiles actually serve to undermine M.A.D.
Russia is worried that the US may gain the ability to launch a nuclear attack on Russia without having to worry about retaliation. Given that many people on this site believe Russia is going back to being the USSR, this may be a valid concern.
_____________________________
-Dave
The Prayer of Protection
The light of God surrounds me,
The love of God enfolds me,
The power of God protects me,
The presence of God watches over me.
Wherever I am, God is.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 11:42:48 AM
|
|
|
mapachito13
Posts: 2253
Joined: 10/1/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SonInMe1
Which brings me to my question...just how much of a threat is Russia today? They are still a thrid world economy. Why do we need a missle system, offensive or defensive, in the Chezck republic? I don't think Russia is a problem..are they?
Excellent question! They are no longer a third world economy and are making oodles of rubles off the oil boom that Russian scientists keep finding and the Russians aren't shy about drilling for. Remember they were upgraded to G7 (making it the G8) status.
If I were to point to three countries to put in the axis of evil it would be Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia. At least Bush got one right!
_____________________________
Peace Sells....But Who's Buying!
"I would argue that the most serious threat to the United States is not someone hiding in a cave in Pakistan or Afghanistan, but our own fiscal irresponsibility."-David Walker, fmr comptroller general of the US
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 11:49:58 AM
|
|
|
mapachito13
Posts: 2253
Joined: 10/1/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
Mutually Assured Destruction: wonderful concept! If that's the goal, why not just everybody blow ourselves up and get it over with. We mustn't try to gain the upper hand, that wouldn't be fair.
Answer this question, if you (or anyone else) can. If we are so bent on going to war with Russia, as some of you seem to think, why didn't we strike when the USSR had just collapsed and the region was in a state of total chaos, politically, militarily, and financially? Why are we waiting until Russia has somewhat gotten back on its feet? Is that part of the Mutually Assured Destruction philosophy? We want to give them a chance to blow us up too? That whole concept is absurd.
-Dave
We don't try to "gain the upper hand" in a vacuum! There will be consequences to that train of thinking and its implementation! The ultimate consequence of that is the world going M.A.D.!
And why do we have to defend ourselves against a country that is now considered an ally. Communism is dead! Shouldn't we be instituting systems to defend against a more credible threat instead of trying to annoy our friends? That is what is absurd!
_____________________________
Peace Sells....But Who's Buying!
"I would argue that the most serious threat to the United States is not someone hiding in a cave in Pakistan or Afghanistan, but our own fiscal irresponsibility."-David Walker, fmr comptroller general of the US
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 11:51:17 AM
|
|
|
SonInMe1
Posts: 3520
Joined: 4/16/2005
From: my mom by God
Status: offline
|
Are these new missles sites in response to protecting europe from those three countries, Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia?
Is europe in step with us protecting them in this way? I kinda thought we were persona non gratis in most european countries today.
To me, there must be a reason why we would put these missles there..and Russia doesn't seem to be the reason.
Maybe if Russia is economically valid today because of its new oil finds, wouldn't the propoer response be to drill for more oil?
_____________________________
You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.
James 4:4
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 12:13:11 PM
|
|
|
blessedinnyc
Posts: 1812
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SonInMe1
This is a misconception. What kept Russia from attacking us was their inability to do so.
Hogwash. Take a look at this Time Magazine article from 1968. Russia had ICBMs- missile that can go across the arctic circle from Russia to the US that they could have fired at us- if they were interested in starting a war that would destroy the world:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,901283,00.html
quote:
Which brings me to my question...just how much of a threat is Russia today? They are still a thrid world economy. Why do we need a missle system, offensive or defensive, in the Chezck republic? I don't think Russia is a problem..are they?
We're not protecting Europe from Russia- we're protecting it from Iran. Russia doesn't get it, and I think we should take at least a few minor steps with our actions to help them understand what's going on.
After all, they have a seat on the security council, have a lot of economic power, have some nuclear weapons, and could be a strategic ally when dealing with the middle east.
quote:
Mutually Assured Destruction: wonderful concept! If that's the goal, why not just everybody blow ourselves up and get it over with. We mustn't try to gain the upper hand, that wouldn't be fair.
Mutually Assured Destruction actually saved tens of millions of lives during the Cold War. Had the US gained an exclusive upper hand, Russia would have been reduced to rubble. Likewise, had Russia done that, the US would have been reduced to rubble.
The very reason we are worried about a nuclear Iran is that Mutually Assured Destruction doesn't work with crazy people.
quote:
To me, there must be a reason why we would put these missles there..and Russia doesn't seem to be the reason.
Exactly. You get it, but Russia doesn't. They don't trust us as much as we do. In order to demonstrate that we're not trying to set up a missile defense system to stop Russian ICBMs, we should at least consider talking to them and seeing if we can accomodate their concerns while still defending Europe.
I think one poke at Russia that the US is making that we may not realize is that we're putting a military installation in a former Soviet-bloc country- Imagine China doing the same thing in Aruba, Bermuda, or Mexico! If we moved things back to a western European country- say Italy (which might be a strategic place to shoot down Iranian missiles crossing the Mediterranean), we could reduce some of the diplomatic damage. (That would be more like China working with a longer-standing ally like Pakistan). Better yet, we could agree to hold off on any missile defense system if Russia can help us stop the Iranians from developing nukes.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 12:55:59 PM
|
|
|
cow451
Posts: 3928
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: offline
|
Folks, this is not your father's USSR. Russia is not the same. The USSR broke up into many countries, most of which are friendly with the West. That's part of why Russia is not a direct threat. They are wanting to increase their influence in their tregion, not ours. The biggest threat from Russia is economic and political if they decide to cozy up to Iran, North Korea, etc.
That is why the missle defense situation makes little sense. We could easily work with Russia on mutual concerns about instability in the region.
_____________________________
Wenn Sie so intelligent sind, warum Sie hier sind?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 2:18:41 PM
|
|
|
WormHeart
Posts: 280
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Denmark - pride of Scandinavia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
Mutually Assured Destruction: wonderful concept! If that's the goal, why not just everybody blow ourselves up and get it over with. We mustn't try to gain the upper hand, that wouldn't be fair.
It’s not about being fair!
Think, man. What happened last time – when the USSR was about to gain the upper hand?
They were about to place missiles in Cuba and would have one up from the US in a nuclear exchange.
What happened?
We came closer to nuclear war than we ever have been before or since. IF Russia thinks the US is about to gain immunity from nuclear strike, they most certainly wont accept it.
Neither would China.
A world dominated by US nuclear weapons is not exactly a dream come true in the rest of the world.
WormHeart
_____________________________
Praise King and Country with might
Bless every Dane at heart
For serving with no fright
The Viking kingdom for Danes is true
With fields and waving beeches
By a sea so blue
National Anthem of Denmark
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 2:20:04 PM
|
|
|
WormHeart
Posts: 280
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Denmark - pride of Scandinavia
Status: offline
|
Secondly - Putin is given an easy ride, if he can show off the US as the bad guy.
Despots love nothing more than a external threat to join the people under their iron boot.
WormHeart
_____________________________
Praise King and Country with might
Bless every Dane at heart
For serving with no fright
The Viking kingdom for Danes is true
With fields and waving beeches
By a sea so blue
National Anthem of Denmark
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 2:52:55 PM
|
|
|
mapachito13
Posts: 2253
Joined: 10/1/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WormHeart
Despots love nothing more than a external threat to join the people under their iron boot.
WormHeart
Are we talking Bush or Putin? 
_____________________________
Peace Sells....But Who's Buying!
"I would argue that the most serious threat to the United States is not someone hiding in a cave in Pakistan or Afghanistan, but our own fiscal irresponsibility."-David Walker, fmr comptroller general of the US
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 2:54:55 PM
|
|
|
davemiller7
Posts: 825
Joined: 3/5/2008
From: NC via NY
Status: offline
|
I guess you missed the sarcasm in my "upper hand" comment. There are those who think that there must be a balance of power at any cost, and mutual destruction would (sort of) guarantee that.
Your point about Cuba: please note that the Soviets backed down. Why did they back down? Because they knew they couldn't win that one. Why couldn't they win if they were so almighty? Because they were so far from the Fatherland, transport and supply would be a major problem, because we caught them in their secret game, and most of all, because they knew their weaponry couldn't match ours. (Nor can it today)
Your point about a world dominated by US nuclear weapons: Being European, you may not really appreciate this, but for the last 20 years, that's the way it has been. Have we used them to gain control of the whole world? NO! If we wanted to control the whole world (or some part of it), why wouldn't we make our attempt when our major adversary was in shambles? It would have been so much easier then.
Your point about Russia or China not wanting the US to be immune from nukes: Why should we care what our potential adversaries think about it? Do you leave your home, family, and possessions unguarded because a potential murderer or thief might not like it?
Now it's YOUR turn to think about it.
-Dave
quote:
ORIGINAL: WormHeart
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
Mutually Assured Destruction: wonderful concept! If that's the goal, why not just everybody blow ourselves up and get it over with. We mustn't try to gain the upper hand, that wouldn't be fair.
It’s not about being fair!
Think, man. What happened last time – when the USSR was about to gain the upper hand?
They were about to place missiles in Cuba and would have one up from the US in a nuclear exchange.
What happened?
We came closer to nuclear war than we ever have been before or since. IF Russia thinks the US is about to gain immunity from nuclear strike, they most certainly wont accept it.
Neither would China.
A world dominated by US nuclear weapons is not exactly a dream come true in the rest of the world.
WormHeart
_____________________________
-Dave
The Prayer of Protection
The light of God surrounds me,
The love of God enfolds me,
The power of God protects me,
The presence of God watches over me.
Wherever I am, God is.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 2:57:41 PM
|
|
|
davemiller7
Posts: 825
Joined: 3/5/2008
From: NC via NY
Status: offline
|
Since when have KGB higher-ups been easy rides? I wouldn't tell him that! Your second statement is very true.
-Dave
quote:
ORIGINAL: WormHeart
Secondly - Putin is given an easy ride, if he can show off the US as the bad guy.
Despots love nothing more than a external threat to join the people under their iron boot.
WormHeart
_____________________________
-Dave
The Prayer of Protection
The light of God surrounds me,
The love of God enfolds me,
The power of God protects me,
The presence of God watches over me.
Wherever I am, God is.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 4:14:29 PM
|
|
|
WormHeart
Posts: 280
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Denmark - pride of Scandinavia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
I guess you missed the sarcasm in my "upper hand" comment.
Seems like it.
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
There are those who think that there must be a balance of power at any cost,
And I am one of them. Power is always a corrupting force. Should any nation gain total dominion it will be for the worse of all.
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
Your point about a world dominated by US nuclear weapons: Being European, you may not really appreciate this, but for the last 20 years, that's the way it has been. Have we used them to gain control of the whole world? NO! If we wanted to control the whole world (or some part of it), why wouldn't we make our attempt when our major adversary was in shambles? It would have been so much easier then.
You miss my point.
The US has had on off good and bad administrations during the time. While you are most certainly the most powerful military on the planet, you have not been un-opposed, and more importantly, you have not had the political motivation to just take it.
I’m not concerned with the current or the coming administration. Both coming candidates seem reasonable.
But if the US has total domination, it is only a matter of time before that will be abused.
Even during the last 20 years, the US has spent the majority of the time throwing its weight around to gain US, not international interests.
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
Your point about Russia or China not wanting the US to be immune from nukes: Why should we care what our potential adversaries think about it?
You missed it.
It’s not about not wanting them to feel bad. If they feel threatened that you are about to have dominion over them, they will start the conflict.
The US would never stand by, while another power got the upper hand, neither will they.
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
Do you leave your home, family, and possessions unguarded because a potential murderer or thief might not like it?
No, but neither do I go around keying the motorcycles belonging to the local bikerclub, just because I have a gun.
WormHeart
_____________________________
Praise King and Country with might
Bless every Dane at heart
For serving with no fright
The Viking kingdom for Danes is true
With fields and waving beeches
By a sea so blue
National Anthem of Denmark
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 7:31:43 PM
|
|
|
wing2000
Posts: 1048
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
That is why the missle defense situation makes little sense. We could easily work with Russia on mutual concerns about instability in the region.
....yea, but cow, missle defense is not intended for Russia (which despite all her noise, still is concerned with self-preservation), rather, irrational players such as Iran.
...of course this only works against ballistic missiles. Dirty bombs are just as much a threat...and harder to prevent.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 7:38:31 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1952
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
This is why we signed the ABM treaty with Russia was so that neither side would gain an advantage in the event of a nuclear. It was a great treaty to until we pulled out in 2002.
quote:
Which brings me to my question...just how much of a threat is Russia today? They are still a thrid world economy. Why do we need a missle system, offensive or defensive, in the Chezck republic? I don't think Russia is a problem..are they?
Their economy is booming now because of energy. They almost shutdown western Europe's supply of natural gas in a standoff with the Ukraine some months ago. Economically they are in much better shape than they have been in since before the fall.
_____________________________
-Roger
1 Thess 5:20 do not treat prophecies with contempt. 21 Test everything. Hold on to the good. (NIV)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 7:46:15 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1952
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Your point about Cuba: please note that the Soviets backed down. Why did they back down? Because they knew they couldn't win that one. Why couldn't they win if they were so almighty? Because they were so far from the Fatherland, transport and supply would be a major problem, because we caught them in their secret game, and most of all, because they knew their weaponry couldn't match ours. (Nor can it today)
Cuba wasn't going to be conventional we had the silos opened and ready to fire. As for who backed down you'll also remember that we removed our missiles from Turkey when all was said and done.
quote:
Your point about a world dominated by US nuclear weapons: Being European, you may not really appreciate this, but for the last 20 years, that's the way it has been. Have we used them to gain control of the whole world? NO! If we wanted to control the whole world (or some part of it), why wouldn't we make our attempt when our major adversary was in shambles? It would have been so much easier then.
The Russians still have plenty of warheads. They have them, we have them and we hope that no one else gets theirs.
quote:
At the beginning of 2008 the Russian strategic forces included 682 strategic delivery platforms, which can carry up to 3100 nuclear warheads.
That's plenty enough to annihilate North America and Europe.
http://russianforces.org/
My opinion is the same as always. If the little boys in Iran or Pakistan want to join the big boys nuke country club I'm all for it. Just so long as they remember that one screw up and the only life left in their little sandboxes will be the cockroaches.
_____________________________
-Roger
1 Thess 5:20 do not treat prophecies with contempt. 21 Test everything. Hold on to the good. (NIV)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 9:23:05 PM
|
|
|
SonInMe1
Posts: 3520
Joined: 4/16/2005
From: my mom by God
Status: offline
|
quote:
Had the US gained an exclusive upper hand, Russia would have been reduced to rubble
Do you actually believe this? We had a great advamntage in nuclear arms for years and never destroyed Russia.
quote:
Should any nation gain total dominion it will be for the worse of all.
Who is number one now? Do you consider the USA a threat to freedom in the world?
_____________________________
You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.
James 4:4
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 10:17:43 PM
|
|
|
SavedByGraceMD
Posts: 739
Joined: 2/13/2008
From: the poconos
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
Of course! All we have to do is sit down and talk with them. Tell them we mean them no harm. Promise them that we'll disarm all our military. Join hands with them and sing Kumbaya. What a great idea! 
Look, all we're saying is that it's usually cheaper for both sides to come up with a diplomatic solution than for us to come up with a military solution.
I don't think Russia wants Iran to get nuclear weapons, either, and they also seem concerned about it. If we hold off just a bit on the missile defense shield for Europe, we may be able to eliminate the need for it by getting Russia to pressure Iran into a diplomatic solution.
If I recall correctly, Russia has been supplying some materials to Iran for its civilian nuclear program. A decision by Russia that such a program is too risky would make it very difficult for Iran to continue and would put China in a difficult spot.
Instead, if the US presses forward with the missile defense system, we will:
1.) Seriously irritate Russia. How would you like it if Russia installed missiles in Cuba? Many people here don't like it that China is drilling for oil off of Cuba.
2.) Miss a chance to get Russia aligned with us on the war against violent religious fanaticism.
3.) Potentially revive the Cold War.
4.) Isolate China, a potential economic and military rival.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't do everything we can to stop the Iranian regime- I'm just saying that we should at least be willing to make some minor concessions to make sure that we can ultimately stop Iran better. Getting Russia on our side against Iran essentially doubles our firepower- they have just as powerful of a military as we do.
Have we forgotten the cuban missile crisis? Isn't that how the cold war got started in the first place. Russia installing missiles on Cuba?
Is it wise for us to do it on their turf? Probably not, but it may be necessary.
As for them not wanting Iran to get nukes, aren't they the ones who built their facilities? I don't think russia cares who has them, because they seem to have their no one can beat us attitude back.
Russia has already been given a chance to align with us in the war on terror, and I think they said no thanks.
And Putin has done more to possibly revive a cold war, than the US has, imho.
_____________________________
Isaiah 41:10
"Fear not for I am with you,
Do not be dismayed for I am your God,
I will strengthen you and help you,
I will uphold you with my righteous right hand"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 10:44:02 PM
|
|
|
blessedinnyc
Posts: 1812
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SonInMe1
Do you actually believe this? We had a great advamntage in nuclear arms for years and never destroyed Russia.
In fact, we came very close to doing this on a wide scale against China. MacArthur and many Senators called for it, and had Truman not been so wishy-washy (or moral), it might have been done:
http://digitalnewspapers.libraries.psu.edu/Default/Skins/BasicArch/Client.asp?Skin=BasicArch&&AppName=2&enter=true&BaseHref=DCG/1953/04/25&EntityId=Ar00300
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,814033-2,00.html
Britain also advocated the use of the A-Bomb in Korea:
http://digitalnewspapers.libraries.psu.edu/Default/Skins/BasicArch/Client.asp?Skin=BasicArch&&AppName=2&enter=true&BaseHref=DCG/1950/12/01&EntityId=Ar00100
Ultimately, MacArthur had to resign because he strongly opposed the president's decision not to use nuclear weapons. Surely, had there been a long war with Russia, it would have only been a matter of time until the right gears and political pressure clicked into place to use the bomb. Indeed, we've considered using it to attack Iran's enrichment site.
quote:
Who is number one now? Do you consider the USA a threat to freedom in the world?
We certainly have been in the past. In 1954, we overthrew the democratically elected government in Guatemala because it wanted to use eminent domain on land owned by the United Fruit Company. In 1973, we overthrew the democratically elected president of Chile because he leaned Socialist. In both cases, we felt that these countries were better off with military dictatorships running counter-insurgency states.
In the early to mid '80s, the US supported two brutal Guatemalan dictators- General Garcia and Efrain Rios Montt. Some of the torture, murder, and attacks on innocent civilians were described in "Death of a Guatemalan village by Victor Montejo.
Now, every major world power has done a lot of terrible things- and the US is a puppy dog compared to what the USSR, China, and heck, Cambodia have done in the past, but the world is probably better off if nobody is the only superpower.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/9/2008 10:59:48 PM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 647
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD
Have we forgotten the cuban missile crisis? Isn't that how the cold war got started in the first place. Russia installing missiles on Cuba?
No. The Cold War began right where WWII left off. It was a political rivalry between communist and non-communist countries, personified by the highly paranoid competition between the (former) Soviet Union and the United States. It was largely a war of words, but there was a lot of espionage and technology-stealing. Eventually, real military action started to happen as extensions of the rivalry: the North/South Korea conflict, the Cuban Missle Crisis, and the North/South Vietnam conflict were all directly tied to the Cold War.
So was the space race, and the arms race.
Ian Flemming came up with James Bond's exploits during this era, if that helps to put things in better perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is the Cold War becoming a HOT issue - 7/10/2008 12:45:37 AM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1952
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
Does one really consider Korea and Vietnam part of the "cold war" when they were US/Sino conflicts and not US/USSR conflicts?
_____________________________
-Roger
1 Thess 5:20 do not treat prophecies with contempt. 21 Test everything. Hold on to the good. (NIV)
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
