« 6TH POPE Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: World Superpowers Threw Their Cards on the Table This Week

By: Zimbler0 in 6TH POPE | Recommend this post (0)
Sat, 25 Feb 23 4:30 AM | 28 view(s)
Boardmark this board | 6th Edition Pope Board
Msg. 40460 of 60008
(This msg. is a reply to 40453 by Fiz)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

Fiz > That said, under MY prefered (most useful) definition of "losing", both the US and USSR lost their respective wars.


Zim : On that, Fiz, you and I can agree.


Fiz > Please consider: they came out vastly worse off for the experience. They came out vastly impoverished, vastly demoralized, vastly reduced in world stature, etc. from what they were when they entered their respective wars.


Zim : I keep reading that, during the Cold War, Russia's defense spending was a much higher percentage of their GDP than we American's spending was.

My personal feeling (and I admit that might be wrong) is that Russia's (USSR actually) losses in Afghanistan contributed to the implosion of the USSR. Another, and bigger factor in the implosion was the Arms Race Reagan pushed the Soviets into.

As for Vietnam - America was NOT impoverished by it. I don't believe we were 'vastly demoralized' and I suspect it more likely that the rest of the world didn't care. Or were happy to see U.S. leave Vietnam with our tails between our legs. Do note that the U.S. was the only country with 'Super Carriers' and we were still projecting military prowess all over the planet.

Yeah. We lost in Vietnam.

But the American economy was BIG enough and robust enough we could afford it. Should we have continued to prosecute the Vietnam War after Nixon? I suspect not.

Zim.




Avatar

Mad Poet Strikes Again.


- - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: World Superpowers Threw Their Cards on the Table This Week
By: Fiz
in 6TH POPE
Sat, 25 Feb 23 2:14 AM
Msg. 40453 of 60008

De: I just gave you a star.

That said, under MY prefered (most useful) definition of "losing", both the US and USSR lost their respective wars. Please consider: they came out vastly worse off for the experience. They came out vastly impoverished, vastly demoralized, vastly reduced in world stature, etc. from what they were when the entered their respective wars. They LOST.

Indeed, virtually all wars in human history end with TWO (or all) LOSERS. It is pretty rare for a country to exit a war having really profited/benefited enough from the experience to really call them a "winner". That is most of the point I keep trying to make here, which some seem unable to even consider. But it is true...or, at least, true enough, especially considering value differences.

There is another important point which is, perhaps, subtle but still worth meditating on: countries are NOT governments. They are not the geography, either.

"Russia"...as Russia, and even its current government, is QUITE distinct from the GOVERNMENT (fictitious entity) known as the USSR. The PEOPLE of who lived in the geographic region we call "Russia" were overwhelmingly anti-Communist by the time the USSR collapsed. Indeed, that is WHY it collapsed; the people had had enough - even if the "government" had not.

I suspect the US is much more "Marxist" now than is Russia. Just saying.;->


« 6TH POPE Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next