Open Daily Quickfire Debates!

[DeletedUser]

Ok 'to protect the motherland from America and western power' was political bs and you know it. Stalin occupied the countries cause he wanted power and yeah it did help protect him.

read my edits on the post you quoted

The US did warn Russia (check my edits). Also if we are talking what the biggest secret was i would like to put the naughty document on the table.

I think America might have had the right to demonize Stalin. Maybe not the country as a whole but it's American media we are insane not much you can do there.
Russia had a bunch of eastern European states protecting it. The only country we could have poured money into that was actually next to it and wasn't in desperate need of money was Turkey. So it was one country. But if we do count the rest of the countries we poured money into I'll be happy to point out that the whole of Europe was essentially rumble.
Well the Cuban missile thing was the only time the US and USSR ever really threatened each other directly. Most of the time it was indirect threats.
Desperately trying to catch up? Yeah much of their industrialized regions were recked but it took them what 4 years to get the atom bomb after the US got one.

I pretty much spent a year of my life studying the history of the cold war in detail.

You seem to be tunnel visioning with your view that America did nothing wrong with their diplomacy towards the USSR and that the USSR singularly caused the cold war.

The USSR culture is different to the American and western one. It's one of the reasons why us westerners cannot believe that the Russians keep voting in Putin year after year to be their President (or Prime Minister briefly).

Here goes the timeline:

America bombs Hiroshima - this happens whilst America/Russia/England/France are discussing how to break up Berlin and the rest of Germany, the Yalta conference. America tells England/France but not Russia.

Russia starts developing nuclear bomb. Arms race begins.

Russia seizes Poland to put buffer between itself and American controlled parts of Germany.

NATO established by America. Pretty much sole intent of NATO at this point is to defend itself against the USSR. Consists of England/France/other European nations including Germany. This is a strong insult to the USSR.

Shortly after NATO the USSR develops and tests its first atomic bomb. Around this time the USSR also wins the Chinese civil war.

US and UN invade Korea/ overthrow Iranian government/ overthrow Guatemalan government.

Warsaw pact.

USSR crushed Hungarian uprising.

USSR launches first satellite (with military and espionage potential)

Fidel Castro takes over Cuba and aligns itself with the USSR. Bay of Pigs happens (first American attack on one of USSR's allies, unprovoked.) Cuban missile crisis. USSR sends missiles to Cuba for defensive use. American fleets ordered to stop envoy. Nearly results in direct war.

(After this both America and Russia realise how close to the edge of human existence they are treading and everything becomes a lot more political with less military involvement.)

Now I'm not saying that the USSR was the angel in this story, very far from it. But as you can see America single out the USSR as the threat and act extremely aggressively towards the USSR.

When you're talking about 'pouring money into Eastern Europe' you're actually referring to the Marshall plan which gave Eastern European countries $120 billion (today's value) in funds to 'Westernise' those countries. This was around the time that Churchill gave a speech condemning communism. The USSR see the Marshall plan as an American plan to 'buy communist countries' and so respond by increasing their hold on the countries on it's borders.

That area of the world at the time was regarded as primarily communist, and all those countries at the time were essentially states of the USSR.

 

[DeletedUser29066]

I pretty much spent a year of my life studying the history of the cold war in detail.

You poor thing. You should ask a pebble for a nice back and shoulder massage

 

[DeletedUser8396]

Do remember these things:

We cannot entirely condemn the action of atomic bombs due to their inability to know as much as we do. A hindsight bias, if you will.

We cannot entirely condemn the US for the act as it was a somewhat a joint agreement between multiple nations, as well as a heavily advised decision through aid of the Secretary of War, the Secretary of State (I think), as well as multiple high level scientists that worked on the creation of the bomb (including Oppenheimer himself. So, it wasn't a "leedle-dee, Ima drop dis bomb..." decision.

Studies and estimates were given to the President that showed a significantly larger number of Japanese would die if an invasion occurred, so acting on this information inclined the act to kill fewerJapanese through 2 bombs than much more through invasion. Whether the studies were correct, we'll never know.

Do I think they were NECESSARY? No. Effective? Of course. Can we condemn them for the act? Not at all. Should we drop more atomic bombs where and when we see fit? Only through extensive debate and deliberation and only as a means to preserve human life by preventing a worse outcome.

 

[DeletedUser33530]

I pretty much spent a year of my life studying the history of the cold war in detail.

You seem to be tunnel visioning with your view that America did nothing wrong with their diplomacy towards the USSR and that the USSR singularly caused the cold war.

not really. The US did alot wrong but so did the USSR. In reality after Stalin died the US probably took the lead spot in wrong doings but i didn't think that was the debate.

The USSR culture is different to the American and western one. It's one of the reasons why us westerners cannot believe that the Russians keep voting in Putin year after year to be their President (or Prime Minister briefly).

Americans vote stupid senators into office year after year so i can relate to living in a country making stupid electoral choices.

Here goes the timeline:

I'm gonna be a pest here so I'm sorry in advance

America bombs Hiroshima - this happens whilst America/Russia/England/France are discussing how to break up Berlin and the rest of Germany, the Yalta conference. America tells England/France but not Russia.

We bomb on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945. The Yalta conference was held February 4–11, 1945. We told Russia about the bomb july 24, 1945 during the Potsdam Conference.

Russia starts developing nuclear bomb. Arms race begins.

The soviet nuclear program began in 1943 with the creation of laboratory No. 2.

Russia seizes Poland to put buffer between itself and American controlled parts of Germany.

Reoccupiation of Poland happened in the summer of 1944 before Hiroshima and the Yalta conference. It also happened arounded the same time as the D-day landings. So american forces weren't in Germany for another half a year and America still had yet to use an atom bomb. Your timelines gets better after this but you have some major history messed up here.

NATO established by America. Pretty much sole intent of NATO at this point is to defend itself against the USSR. Consists of England/France/other European nations including Germany. This is a strong insult to the USSR.

4 April 1949

Shortly after NATO the USSR develops and tests its first atomic bomb. Around this time the USSR also wins the Chinese civil war.

the soviets had been developing their bomb for a while and the first test was 29 of August 1949. If by USSR you mean the CCP then they yes that happened on October 1, 1949. If you say that the USSR aiding the CCP makes it a USSR victory I'm gonna point out that such logic would make the USSR both victors and loser of WWII.

US and UN invade Korea/ overthrow Iranian government/ overthrow Guatemalan government.

June 25, 1950/ 1953 props to the CIA/ 1954 again props the the CIA although not as much

Warsaw pact.

14 May 1955

USSR crushed Hungarian uprising.

14 May 1955 im gonna stop posting dates unless you go backwards in time like you did once in the beginning

USSR launches first satellite (with military and espionage potential)

Fidel Castro takes over Cuba and aligns itself with the USSR. Bay of Pigs happens (first American attack on one of USSR's allies, unprovoked.) Cuban missile crisis. USSR sends missiles to Cuba for defensive use. American fleets ordered to stop envoy. Nearly results in direct war.

(After this both America and Russia realise how close to the edge of human existence they are treading and everything becomes a lot more political with less military involvement.)

Now I'm not saying that the USSR was the angel in this story, very far from it. But as you can see America single out the USSR as the threat and act extremely aggressively towards the USSR.

that last sentence is a summary of modern American foreign policy lol.
If it was just America acting aggressive towards the USSR than it wouldn't be called the cold war as a war implies two sides fighting in some way. Believe me i understand perfectly the amount of stupid choices that the America government has made but you can't pin the blame solely on us.

When you're talking about 'pouring money into Eastern Europe' you're actually referring to the Marshall plan which gave Eastern European countries $120 billion (today's value) in funds to 'Westernise' those countries. This was around the time that Churchill gave a speech condemning communism. The USSR see the Marshall plan as an American plan to 'buy communist countries' and so respond by increasing their hold on the countries on it's borders.

in fairness to the USSR that sort of was the plan lol

That area of the world at the time was regarded as primarily communist, and all those countries at the time were essentially states of the USSR.

this one i just quoted so this all would look nice


ok i think you have lost sight of what we were talking about. The debate was (i think), did Stalin know the US had the atom bomb before it was dropped. As shown by both my dates on a previous post and your skipping through time in the beginning of this timeline i think the answer has been shown to be yes.

Spoiler: my dates

First successful nuclear test was on July 16, 1945. We told stalin that we had "a new weapon of unusual destructive force" on July 24, 1945. Stalin really didn't care if you are interested in knowing. On August 6, 1945 Hiroshima was turned to rumble. Although Truman's description was vague later that day (july 24, 1945) Stalin ordered a telegram sent to those working on the atomic bomb in Russia to hurry with the job. So he knew what Truman meant.

 

[DeletedUser40768]

America bombs Hiroshima - this happens whilst America/Russia/England/France are discussing how to break up Berlin and the rest of Germany, the Yalta conference. America tells England/France but not Russia.

The United States, Great Britain, Germany, and the U.S.S.R. were all putting scientific research into developing an atomic bomb. Not like Russia had no clue the US was trying to make one. As cheater mentioned, Truman told Stalin they have a very destructive bomb. To think Stalin would have no clue what he was referencing to at Postdam is silly.

Russia starts developing nuclear bomb. Arms race begins.

Arm race in 1945 or 1946? Yeah not really.

NATO established by America. Pretty much sole intent of NATO at this point is to defend itself against the USSR. Consists of England/France/other European nations including Germany. This is a strong insult to the USSR.

An insult. lol I guess the irony is that those countries that got conquered and oppressed by the Soviet Union felt strongly insulted too. After the war Russia was the only real imperialistic country left, naturally the other nations wanted to make sure they couldn't start another World War.

For the US it was a policy of containment, which was to prevent the spread of communism. If you remember what the objection of communism was, it was to spread it to the whole world. Naturally that principle being a main objective of communism wouldn't sit well with the non communist nations.

Fidel Castro takes over Cuba and aligns itself with the USSR. Bay of Pigs happens (first American attack on one of USSR's allies, unprovoked.) Cuban missile crisis. USSR sends missiles to Cuba for defensive use. American fleets ordered to stop envoy. Nearly results in direct war.

Unprovoked? The US gave Cuba its independence just a few decades before, and now the government is overthrown by a dictator worse than the first and one that turns Cuba into a communist nation. Can't see the outrage over having a communist nation run by a rebel government just 90 miles or so away from the US. However it should also be said that the US had missiles in Turkey pointed at Russia.

Sure did the United States do some things wrong, absolutely. To make it like the USSR was bullied into the situation however is incorrect. Honestly I can't understand how anyone can defend Stalin when he killed many of his own citizens,what was that purge called again :heh:

 

[DeletedUser]

Nah I'm just saying that both America and the USSR are to blame for the cold war, and that it wasn't just the USSR who caused it.

If you disagree with that statement then I'm happy to debate, but in the post above you're trying to debate facts which are proven facts (which I was taught, so actually you never know... Those facts might be wrong. I had a very biased history lecturer.)

 

[DeletedUser40768]

Nah I'm just saying that both America and the USSR are to blame for the cold war, and that it wasn't just the USSR who caused it.

I can agree with this.

 

[DeletedUser33530]

I can agree with this.

I agree with this agreement.

 

[DeletedUser]

Well yes and the pundits agree with you:

The Traditional View
At first, western writers blamed Russia. They said Stalin was trying to build up a Soviet empire.

The Revisionist View
Later, however, some western historians blamed America. They said Truman had not understood how much Russia had suffered in the Second World War.

The Post-Revisionists
Later still, historians think BOTH sides were to blame – that there were hatreds on both sides.

Most recently, historians agree that the Cold War was primarily a clash of beliefs - Communism versus Capitalism.

but for me whenever anything like this happened a certain cigar smoking b*gger was never far away...

Spoiler

Churchill's Iron Curtain Speech at Westminster College Fulton Missouri March 5th 1946

 

[DeletedUser]

You're blaming Churchill for the cold war?

He did give the iron wall speech, but that was it. He wasn't even the Prime Minister at the time of the speech.

 

[DeletedUser]

You're blaming Churchill for the cold war?

He did give the iron wall speech, but that was it. He wasn't even the Prime Minister at the time of the speech.

Much like Nixon during the Vietnam War and the current right wing Senatorial opposition to Obama in the USA. Churchill did not need to be in legitimate power to effect political mischief making. Indeed he relished these reckless shenanigans.

British voters turned Churchill out of office in 1945, but he carried on in his efforts to build a strong anti-Soviet consensus in the West. In a famous 1946 speech delivered in Missouri, Churchill warned that the Soviet Union had built an "Iron Curtain" to divide Soviet-dominated Eastern Europe from the West. He thus coined one of the most defining terms of the Cold War era.

A close political confidante of American presidents Harry S. Truman, Churchill hoped to join the Americans in building a post war order that dominated Europe and the globe and; not withstanding the fact that Soviet Union had lost 20 million dead defeating Germany and annihilating the Nazis; halt the advance of communism.

The United Kingdom had been brought to it’s economic knees during WW2 and the British Empire was crumbling. The USA loaned the UK during WW2 $3.75 billion (US$57 billion in 2015) at a 2% interest rate. The USA held a substantial proportion of the UK’s gold reserve as collateral for the debt. Consequently the Soviet Union with it’s ideology and economic power was seen as the major obstacle to British financial recovery and, at that time, the resurrection of Imperial interests.

Thus it was that Churchill went to the USA during the 1946 mid term elections to Congress. These elections were largely seen as a vote of confidence in Harry S Truman who just taken office following the death of Franklin D Roosevelt. It was in that context that Churchill deliberately and conclusively killed off any hope of avoiding the Cold War with his (in)famous “Iron Curtain” speech.

 

[DeletedUser33530]

OK so you are blaming a half century long struggle on one speech made by a powerless politician about something that was already happening and known by most. That's like blaming the existence of gravity on Newton.

 

[DeletedUser8396]

OK so you are blaming a half century long struggle on one speech made by a powerless politician about something that was already happening and known by most. That's like blaming the existence of gravity on Newton.

Well, in a sense, gravity didn't exist before Newton. But that would be an entirely different and quite odd debate lol.

As for Churchill causing the Cold War, that's a bit of a stretch. Not saying no, but that's a very tough case to make.

 

[DeletedUser33530]

Well, in a sense, gravity didn't exist before Newton. But that would be an entirely different and quite odd debate lol.

As for Churchill causing the Cold War, that's a bit of a stretch. Not saying no, but that's a very tough case to make.

Screw you pebble you know what I meant.

 

[DeletedUser]

Nah I'm with pebble on this one. Worst analogy of 2015.

 

[DeletedUser33530]

Nah I'm with pebble on this one. Shíttiest analogy of 2015.

Líke you could do better

 

[DeletedUser]

Just because he was the first person to articulate the concept of gravity certainly didn't mean it didn't exist before then.

 

[DeletedUser8396]

Just because he was the first person to articulate the concept of gravity certainly didn't mean it didn't exist before then.

Well, you have to look at it through a certain lens. Let me show you:

Before the idea of gravity was termed, there must be an explanation. In order for their to be a concept, there must be something existing and those to perceive it.

While I certainly agree that the force termed as gravity existed, the fact that it had no been termed, explained, or conceptualized makes it not exist in any form greater than as a universal force. It doesn't have a key necessity in the field of existence: perception and definition.

For example: Let us say there is a species that we currently have never seen or heard of. As it has not been conceptualized, it does not exist in our mindset of our would.

It's a manner of thinking. Am I proposing the force didnt exist before the first articulation/conceptualization? Of course not. But simply making the observation that at one point in time it was not existent in the perspective of those once inhabiting the world.

 

[DeletedUser]

Nah I'm with pebble on this one. Shíttiest analogy of 2015.

Hey nub. I missed something out. I forgot to mention my killer point.

Spoiler

 

[DeletedUser49197]