quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium The Afghanistan war cost Soviets a lot of money every year (billions of $$$), and lowering energy prices have doomed the war. Gorbachev came to power and immediately planned out pull-out of Afghanistan. However, Soviet leadership considered that a slow pull-out would be more appropriate to help strengthen their allies and the support against non-communist forces. This way the Soviet withdrawal will be viewed as positive by communist sympathizers in Afghanistan who were against Soviet occupation. In most ways, these and other Soviet strategies failed, and the occupation dragged on for another 4 years costing much more money and resources. In the end they had to abruptly pull out anyways. The delay really hurt Soviet Union. In late 1980s, energy prices hit rock bottom. The leadership refused to back down from the massive military spending, and the cuts were then forced on the population - cuts in health care, housing accomodations, luxuries, even basic supplies and food - resulting in huge waiting lines everywhere. There was not enough money for all of it. While the military spending was only lowered slightly. Soviet Union pulled out of most of Eastern Europe to cut costs and win Western support.

Why does "Bush Administration" jump to mind?

How was foreign intervention responsible for the USSR collapse? Are the 5 voters saying that if it wasn't for a supposed foreign intervention, there would be a USSR today? Doesn't make sense with what was reality.

___________________

before i say anything.. i haven't voted, cause i don't know, nor can i reasonably speculate as to THE cause of the collapse.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton How was foreign intervention responsible for the USSR collapse? Are the 5 voters saying that if it wasn't for a supposed foreign intervention, there would be a USSR today? Doesn't make sense with what was reality.

foreign intervention definitely played it's role.

the space race/ weapons stockpile aspects of the cold war were quite a distraction for both the people and leadership of the USSR. had that not existed, who's to say that the mental energies of the upper leadership wouldn't have come to some of the same conclusions that china has reached. that there has to be some allowance for enterprise to rise from motivated members of the population to meet the basic demand for goods and to spark some form of economic stimulus.

unfortunately, they became victimized by their own anti-capitalist doctrine (which, may not have been so severe had there not been a capitalist enemy).

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton How was foreign intervention responsible for the USSR collapse? Are the 5 voters saying that if it wasn't for a supposed foreign intervention, there would be a USSR today? Doesn't make sense with what was reality.

quote:

Originally posted by ResonantDrag before i say anything.. i haven't voted, cause i don't know, nor can i reasonably speculate as to THE cause of the collapse. foreign intervention definitely played it's role. the space race/ weapons stockpile aspects of the cold war were quite a distraction for both the people and leadership of the USSR. had that not existed, who's to say that the mental energies of the upper leadership wouldn't have come to some of the same conclusions that china has reached. that there has to be some allowance for enterprise to rise from motivated members of the population to meet the basic demand for goods and to spark some form of economic stimulus. unfortunately, they became victimized by their own anti-capitalist doctrine (which, may not have been so severe had there not been a capitalist enemy).

Its true that the rhetoric that Soviet Union collapsed due to foreign intervention is weak in evidence and common sense. Mainly its because Soviet leadership was making the decisions, not the moles in its government - of course the West was giving it support in pro-Western changes and lying to it that it will help the new leadership, but I wouldn't consider that foreign intervention. Communist Party approved the changes, they wanted them in some ways. There was a continuing rift within the Party, but its hardly from intervention. I spent years searching and I couldn't find the evidence or even common sense thinking of the foreign intervention moves, thats usually just an excuse to blame their own problems on the West. There was no Western "terrorism" or subversive activities going on within Soviet Union at the time, nothing to suggest the intervention. People themselves got sick of the old regime and were liking the changes. There was no turning back but the hardliners couldn't care less. Thats why everything collapsed like a house of cards. Soviet regime have oppressed the country so much, though everyone "supported" the regime, once the time came around for people to support the hardliners, pretty much noone came.

I seriously believe that Yeltsin could've been a Western agent for his achievements that he orchestrated resulting the collapse and continuing degredation and decline of Soviet Union and Russian sphere in general. Many of Yeltsin's "mistakes", such as give-aways of natural resources to Western companies and Russian mafia, criminal syndicates for fire-sale prices, ignoring and embracing the corruption by dealing with shady Russian business and mafia people, not tackling the obvious instances of breaking the law and Constitution by everyone from business to military to government officials, ignoring the independent and autohritarian stances of some of the Russian republics and not properly reaching compromise, massive failure in first Chechen War against underarmed and much smaller resistance, bad economic practises that led to the 1998 default, ignoring the status and living of veterans, pensioners, farmers, students, small business, etc. while his OWN family was being educated in the West, he was being accused of having substantial personal/family bank accounts in Switzerland, and also accused of letting his subordinates (especially his daughter) run the country and MAKE DECISIONS. Apart from that, he was a really bad alcoholic, and we have seen him really drunk on several occassions on TV.

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture