Suicidal Muslims and nuclear weapons

[Woberts]

Your post is ridiculous!

I'm not the one advocating for religious discrimination.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I'm not the one advocating for religious discrimination.

Or nuclear war against the Russians.

 

[Woberts]

Or nuclear war against the Russians.

Aye, that too. Real talk though, I wouldn't have been surprised if Russia launched nukes at us. What, with all the "better dead than red" stuff happenin'.
Well, if they weren't involved in the bloodiest theater of war to date, that is.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Quips, maybe?

The word for the day I guess

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Aye, that too. Real talk though, I wouldn't have been surprised if Russia launched nukes at us. What, with all the "better dead than red" stuff happenin'.
Well, if they weren't involved in the bloodiest theater of war to date, that is.

Whether or not the Russians were ever in a position to unilaterally attack "us" is highly debatable. The more history of the period that comes to light, the more it seems like any nuclear exchange was more likely to start with the Americans. That's not to say the Russians weren't a serious threat, in both conventional and CBRN abilities. I heard a good podcast about this just the other day; Hardcore History 59 The Destroyer of Worlds that was very good. Long, but thorough.

 

[Woberts]

Whether or not the Russians were ever in a position to unilaterally attack "us" is highly debatable. The more history of the period that comes to light, the more it seems like any nuclear exchange was more likely to start with the Americans. That's not to say the Russians weren't a serious threat, in both conventional and CBRN abilities. I heard a good podcast about this just the other day; Hardcore History 59 The Destroyer of Worlds that was very good. Long, but thorough.

Eh, now that I thought a bit about it, it probably wouldn't have happened even if they could attack America. Trotsky was the one interested in an international revolution, not Stalin. At least, Stalin was more interested in Russia during his time in power.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Eh, now that I thought a bit about it, it probably wouldn't have happened even if they could attack America. Trotsky was the one interested in an international revolution, not Stalin. At least, Stalin was more interested in Russia during his time in power.

Correct. The inconvenient fact is that the Soviets sincerely believed they were the defensive party in the Cold War. How justified they were in this belief is tremendously arguable, I'm sure many theses have been written both pro and con. But the fact remains, the Soviets seem to have genuinely believed they were acting defensively.

 

[Stevicus]

Correct. The inconvenient fact is that the Soviets sincerely believed they were the defensive party in the Cold War. How justified they were in this belief is tremendously arguable, I'm sure many theses have been written both pro and con. But the fact remains, the Soviets seem to have genuinely believed they were acting defensively.

In a lot of ways, that was true. They had been on the defensive from the very beginning, going back to WW1, then the Russian Civil War, when the US, UK, and other Allied powers sided with the Tsarist counter-revolutionaries against the Bolsheviks (who could then say they were defending Mother Russia against foreign imperialist aggressors). Most Americans aren't even aware that we were involved in the Russian Civil War, but the Russians never forgot.

I've also seen some speculation that the Soviets might have made an agreement with the Western Allies as early as 1938 to deal with Germany. But when the West made the Munich Agreement and embraced a policy of Appeasement, Stalin wrote off the West. He had to hedge his own bets, which is why he made a separate agreement with Hitler. Perhaps he was hoping to play off the West and Germany against each other, which would weaken his capitalist enemies and give the Soviet Union an advantage in Europe.

Historically, Russia has been invaded numerous times from all directions. That they would want and demand various buffers of territory as a way of defending against invasion should not have been a great surprise to anyone towards the end of WW2. (The US was no different with our Monroe Doctrine, which we also saw as defensive in nature.)

I think the real sticky point which propelled us into the Cold War was disagreement over what to do about Germany itself. The Allies were not entirely in agreement. The Soviets (along with the French and a minority of US/UK leaders) wanted to completely dismember Germany - removing all their industries and infrastructure and turn the entire country into a giant goat pasture.

However, the prevailing views in the US and UK were still concerned about communist expansion and thought it would be better to rebuild and reindustrialize their part of occupied Germany - to be used as an effective weapon and counter against possible Soviet expansionism. The Soviets considered this to be a threat and an act of treachery on the part of the Western Allies. This is why there came to be an East Germany and a West Germany, along with an East Berlin and a West Berlin - which the Soviets also saw as an enemy outpost within their own territory.

Successful Allied interventions in Greece and Turkey brought those countries into the Western fold, which was also seen as threatening to the Russians due to their geographical proximity.

With Western diplomatic successes in the Middle East, we also lined up Iraq, Iran, and Pakistan against the Soviet Union.

We also sided with Chiang Kai-Shek against the Chinese Communists in that country's civil war - although we were more than a bit disgusted with the atrocities of Chiang's Nationalist regime. Our hope in China was to mediate a deal which could keep China free from Soviet influence, but that was not to be - at least not right away. We also reformed Japan in our own image as an industrialized bulwark against communism.

So, from one end of the Soviet Union to the other, from Western Europe to the Middle East to Japan and the Far East - the Western Allies had the Soviets surrounded. The Soviets perceived the Western strategy of encirclement and saw it as a threat. So from that point of view, it is arguable that much of what they did was defensive in nature, since they saw themselves on the defensive all along.

 

[Anthem]

Depends what you define as a threat.