Page 19 of 24 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 231

Thread: 'Death to Obama' sign holder in Md. detained

  1. #181
    Educator sam_w's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    09-24-09 @ 04:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    724

    Re: 'Death to Obama' sign holder in Md. detained

    Quote Originally Posted by PogueMoran View Post
    Yeah because having one's butt kicked would actually mean the other person actually made a point not a personal attack. He attacked the moment I said the cold war ended in 91 after Reagan was out of office. So Erod where was the willie horton ad against Bush?
    Whether the Soviet Union collapsed in 91 or 87 is meaningless, as the events transpiring in the Soviet Union had little to do with the West. This was a slow progression that began the final slide under Brezhnev in the mid 1970s when the Politburo began to slowly recognize the endemic corruption throughout the entire system, especially in agriculture.

    As always in a state such as these totalitarian it is the secret police who have the most accurate knowledge of the conditions of the state. Even the highest ranking of CP members were not ever told true economic data and the conditions of corruption and productivity. The KGB on the other hand were aware. In 1982 the Politburo recognized this, although they did not know specifically or exactly what was wrong, but they were aware serious problems existed. Hence Yuri Andropov's selection, he who previously held the Director of the KGB post would be most aware of the current state of the Union. Upon his death, his chosen successor was to be Mikhael Gorbachev, but instead reactionary forces selected Chernenko. This was the first sign of a growing rift within the Soviet Union between factions that would ultimately tear apart the Soviet Union. Upon Chernenko's death the reform minded CP members were able to act upon Andropov's wishes and selected Gorbachev, while also elevating a number of younger reform minded party members. It is most often misunderstood that the two factions that struggled during this time right up until August 1991 were simply in disagreement on how to save the Soviet Union, there never was any real attempt at changing the Soviet model, only enhancement and reform. But Gorbachev's reforms were not only not successful, they brought into more light the systematic problems with the system that were born with Stalin.

    Starting back in the early 1970s in Poland, there was the same forces that saw that the system itself needed reforming, so there was a opening in control that we in the West would see as pro-democracy or pro-freedom movements. This was not the intention per se of the reformers, they merely wanted to end the systematic corruption and low productivity in the economy. The classic example of this opening was shown to Polish viewers, and people around the world the movie Man of Marble. The significance of this movie was it not only showed to Polish viewers aspects of the system they where previously not allowed to see, but an acknowledgment of the continuing cycle of openness and repression that occurred throughout all of Eastern Europe since 1945. It is interesting to note that in this film, the journey of the protagonist ends in a certain Gdansk shipyards, otherwise known as the Lenin Shipyards, to be made famous years later by the Solidarity movement. Essentially we see in this film, made in 1976, the roots of the Solidarity movement 5 years before it took shape. The very fact this film was not only made, but also released was quite significant. It should be understood in the context of history that this occured at a time when the CP of Poland sought the best model to release them from systematic ills was to open up society more, to which the cycle was to soon close again in 1981. Most in the West saw Poland in 1981 as a dramatic and strange occurrence that sprung from nowhere, without understanding these where trends throughout all of the Eastern bloc since 1945.

    So in essence, whether Ronald Reagan was in office or not, made very little difference at all. The Soviet Union cared little about Ronald Reagan, as he had truly very little impact at all with the growing problems within the Soviet Union. The argument that ultimately is used, that Reagan outspent the Soviets, is rather moot to say the least. The infection that ultimately caved the system began in the early 1970s, some argue as far back as Khrushchev. Whether the Soviet Union had to spend more or less on tanks had no bearing what so ever as it still would not have addressed the issue anyways whether the Soviets could move from Heavy to Light industry, and the most important of all whether they could reform the agriculture industry that was yearly loosing production. It also would have had no effect on the systematic corruption that under Brezhnev was allowed to flourish (his own son in-law was involved in one of the most famous corruption scandals).

    So people can claim as much as they want that "Reagan won the cold war", unfortunately reality says differently.

  2. #182
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,571

    Re: 'Death to Obama' sign holder in Md. detained

    Quote Originally Posted by sam_w View Post
    Whether the Soviet Union collapsed in 91 or 87 is meaningless, as the events transpiring in the Soviet Union had little to do with the West. This was a slow progression that began the final slide under Brezhnev in the mid 1970s when the Politburo began to slowly recognize the endemic corruption throughout the entire system, especially in agriculture.

    As always in a state such as these totalitarian it is the secret police who have the most accurate knowledge of the conditions of the state. Even the highest ranking of CP members were not ever told true economic data and the conditions of corruption and productivity. The KGB on the other hand were aware. In 1982 the Politburo recognized this, although they did not know specifically or exactly what was wrong, but they were aware serious problems existed. Hence Yuri Andropov's selection, he who previously held the Director of the KGB post would be most aware of the current state of the Union. Upon his death, his chosen successor was to be Mikhael Gorbachev, but instead reactionary forces selected Chernenko. This was the first sign of a growing rift within the Soviet Union between factions that would ultimately tear apart the Soviet Union. Upon Chernenko's death the reform minded CP members were able to act upon Andropov's wishes and selected Gorbachev, while also elevating a number of younger reform minded party members. It is most often misunderstood that the two factions that struggled during this time right up until August 1991 were simply in disagreement on how to save the Soviet Union, there never was any real attempt at changing the Soviet model, only enhancement and reform. But Gorbachev's reforms were not only not successful, they brought into more light the systematic problems with the system that were born with Stalin.

    Starting back in the early 1970s in Poland, there was the same forces that saw that the system itself needed reforming, so there was a opening in control that we in the West would see as pro-democracy or pro-freedom movements. This was not the intention per se of the reformers, they merely wanted to end the systematic corruption and low productivity in the economy. The classic example of this opening was shown to Polish viewers, and people around the world the movie Man of Marble. The significance of this movie was it not only showed to Polish viewers aspects of the system they where previously not allowed to see, but an acknowledgment of the continuing cycle of openness and repression that occurred throughout all of Eastern Europe since 1945. It is interesting to note that in this film, the journey of the protagonist ends in a certain Gdansk shipyards, otherwise known as the Lenin Shipyards, to be made famous years later by the Solidarity movement. Essentially we see in this film, made in 1976, the roots of the Solidarity movement 5 years before it took shape. The very fact this film was not only made, but also released was quite significant. It should be understood in the context of history that this occured at a time when the CP of Poland sought the best model to release them from systematic ills was to open up society more, to which the cycle was to soon close again in 1981. Most in the West saw Poland in 1981 as a dramatic and strange occurrence that sprung from nowhere, without understanding these where trends throughout all of the Eastern bloc since 1945.

    So in essence, whether Ronald Reagan was in office or not, made very little difference at all. The Soviet Union cared little about Ronald Reagan, as he had truly very little impact at all with the growing problems within the Soviet Union. The argument that ultimately is used, that Reagan outspent the Soviets, is rather moot to say the least. The infection that ultimately caved the system began in the early 1970s, some argue as far back as Khrushchev. Whether the Soviet Union had to spend more or less on tanks had no bearing what so ever as it still would not have addressed the issue anyways whether the Soviets could move from Heavy to Light industry, and the most important of all whether they could reform the agriculture industry that was yearly loosing production. It also would have had no effect on the systematic corruption that under Brezhnev was allowed to flourish (his own son in-law was involved in one of the most famous corruption scandals).

    So people can claim as much as they want that "Reagan won the cold war", unfortunately reality says differently.


    I will take "What is "reagan revisionist history" for $200, Jack"....
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  3. #183
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Last Seen
    11-03-11 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,834

    Re: 'Death to Obama' sign holder in Md. detained

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und View Post
    I will take "What is "reagan revisionist history" for $200, Jack"....
    Answer: "Reagan singlehandedly ended the cold war when he jumped on air force one, drunk down a handle of Jameson. Went to Russia kicked Gorbechev in the balls and punched out a bear."

  4. #184
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,571

    Re: 'Death to Obama' sign holder in Md. detained

    Quote Originally Posted by PogueMoran View Post
    Answer: "Reagan singlehandedly ended the cold war when he jumped on air force one, drunk down a handle of Jameson. Went to Russia kicked Gorbechev in the balls and punched out a bear."


    Hyperbole and strawmen. How fun!
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  5. #185
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Last Seen
    11-03-11 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,834

    Re: 'Death to Obama' sign holder in Md. detained

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und View Post
    I'll take "what is a death blow, for $500 Jack"......
    Answer: "History beats the whitewashed revisionist Reagan legends everytime"

  6. #186
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Last Seen
    11-03-11 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,834

    Re: 'Death to Obama' sign holder in Md. detained

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und View Post
    Hyperbole and strawmen. How fun!
    Just about as fun as your setting up of jeopardy questions with a host called Jack? The fact is the cold war ended in spite of Reagan. Your comment about Reagan ending the cold war is just about as scholarly as Columbus founding America.

    But again you can't seem to tell the difference between a joke and a strawman. In order for it to be a strawman I would actually have to claim you're making an argument you're not making just so I can knock it down.
    Last edited by PogueMoran; 08-18-09 at 05:30 PM.

  7. #187
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,571

    Re: 'Death to Obama' sign holder in Md. detained

    Quote Originally Posted by PogueMoran View Post
    Just about as fun as your setting up of jeopardy questions with a host called Jack? The fact is the cold war ended in spite of Reagan. Your comment about Reagan ending the cold war is just about as scholarly as Columbus founding America.

    Ok mr. revisionist... Reagan had nothing to do with ending the cold war. and sorry I got the wrong jeopardy guy, I get off my couch every now and then.... lol:


    But again you can't seem to tell the difference between a joke and a strawman. In order for it to be a strawman I would actually have to claim you're making an argument you're not making just so I can knock it down.



    hmm, or, just or, you suxors at teh humorz..... Just sayin... This is twice now.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  8. #188
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:04 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,558

    Re: 'Death to Obama' sign holder in Md. detained

    Quote Originally Posted by sam_w View Post
    Whether the Soviet Union collapsed in 91 or 87 is meaningless, as the events transpiring in the Soviet Union had little to do with the West. This was a slow progression that began the final slide under Brezhnev in the mid 1970s when the Politburo began to slowly recognize the endemic corruption throughout the entire system, especially in agriculture.

    As always in a state such as these totalitarian it is the secret police who have the most accurate knowledge of the conditions of the state. Even the highest ranking of CP members were not ever told true economic data and the conditions of corruption and productivity. The KGB on the other hand were aware. In 1982 the Politburo recognized this, although they did not know specifically or exactly what was wrong, but they were aware serious problems existed. Hence Yuri Andropov's selection, he who previously held the Director of the KGB post would be most aware of the current state of the Union. Upon his death, his chosen successor was to be Mikhael Gorbachev, but instead reactionary forces selected Chernenko. This was the first sign of a growing rift within the Soviet Union between factions that would ultimately tear apart the Soviet Union. Upon Chernenko's death the reform minded CP members were able to act upon Andropov's wishes and selected Gorbachev, while also elevating a number of younger reform minded party members. It is most often misunderstood that the two factions that struggled during this time right up until August 1991 were simply in disagreement on how to save the Soviet Union, there never was any real attempt at changing the Soviet model, only enhancement and reform. But Gorbachev's reforms were not only not successful, they brought into more light the systematic problems with the system that were born with Stalin.

    Starting back in the early 1970s in Poland, there was the same forces that saw that the system itself needed reforming, so there was a opening in control that we in the West would see as pro-democracy or pro-freedom movements. This was not the intention per se of the reformers, they merely wanted to end the systematic corruption and low productivity in the economy. The classic example of this opening was shown to Polish viewers, and people around the world the movie Man of Marble. The significance of this movie was it not only showed to Polish viewers aspects of the system they where previously not allowed to see, but an acknowledgment of the continuing cycle of openness and repression that occurred throughout all of Eastern Europe since 1945. It is interesting to note that in this film, the journey of the protagonist ends in a certain Gdansk shipyards, otherwise known as the Lenin Shipyards, to be made famous years later by the Solidarity movement. Essentially we see in this film, made in 1976, the roots of the Solidarity movement 5 years before it took shape. The very fact this film was not only made, but also released was quite significant. It should be understood in the context of history that this occured at a time when the CP of Poland sought the best model to release them from systematic ills was to open up society more, to which the cycle was to soon close again in 1981. Most in the West saw Poland in 1981 as a dramatic and strange occurrence that sprung from nowhere, without understanding these where trends throughout all of the Eastern bloc since 1945.

    So in essence, whether Ronald Reagan was in office or not, made very little difference at all. The Soviet Union cared little about Ronald Reagan, as he had truly very little impact at all with the growing problems within the Soviet Union. The argument that ultimately is used, that Reagan outspent the Soviets, is rather moot to say the least. The infection that ultimately caved the system began in the early 1970s, some argue as far back as Khrushchev. Whether the Soviet Union had to spend more or less on tanks had no bearing what so ever as it still would not have addressed the issue anyways whether the Soviets could move from Heavy to Light industry, and the most important of all whether they could reform the agriculture industry that was yearly loosing production. It also would have had no effect on the systematic corruption that under Brezhnev was allowed to flourish (his own son in-law was involved in one of the most famous corruption scandals).

    So people can claim as much as they want that "Reagan won the cold war", unfortunately reality says differently.
    And for a differing view . . .

    How Reagan won the Cold War. - By Fred Kaplan - Slate Magazine

    (Just matching opinion with opinion here.)
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  9. #189
    Educator sam_w's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    09-24-09 @ 04:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    724

    Re: 'Death to Obama' sign holder in Md. detained

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und View Post
    I will take "What is "reagan revisionist history" for $200, Jack"....
    The answer Alex is the good Reverend is poorly educated, and easily manipulated by propaganda. Should the good Reverend have actually been educated in a proper institution, received at least a Masters or PhD on this very subject, they would know this instantly.

  10. #190
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,044

    Re: 'Death to Obama' sign holder in Md. detained

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und View Post
    I will take "What is "reagan revisionist history" for $200, Jack"....
    He's actually partially correct. Our own people acknowledge that the Soviet Union crumbled under the weight of a government that was over stretched, dealing with dozens of cultural ethnicities and providing for tens of satellites across the world. The only people who still believe that Reagan played any serious role in the downfall of the Soviets are Americans and Russians who now feel they are worse off then before. If anything Reagan was more like the dog barking at what was the inevitable fall of a giant who was trying to do too much at the same time. I think you should read this paper. It's by a former Russian politician who works for the AEI now. It was a matter of time before the Russians fell and Reagan just happened to be there to witness it and take credit for it regardless of the real contributing factors to it's fall.

    Remember that it was called 'the cold war'. Not a single shot was fired in the open by either power. We didn't beat the Russians by blowing up their industries. We didn't beat them by blowing up Moscow. We didn't go to the Kremlin and kidnap Lenin's body. None of this happened. So stating that Reagan had any real serious effect in the war and was the one who ended up 'beating' them shows a completely American view of what actually happened.

    http://www.aei.org/issue/25991

    As a result, I decided to turn to more academic pursuits. The title of my latest book, which I would like to discuss today, can be translated as The Collapse of an Empire: Lessons for Modern Russia.[1] It relates the story of the last few years of the Soviet Union. But when I wrote about the collapse of the Soviet Union, I also had in mind dilemmas of contemporary Russia.

    There were several factors which pushed me to write this book. The first was the rise in oil prices, which in real terms have started to approach the level of the late Brezhnev period. The second was the disturbing tendency to mythologize the late Soviet period in current Russian society and popular culture. These myths include the belief that, despite its problems, the Soviet Union was a dynamically developing world superpower until usurpers initiated disastrous reforms. At least 80 percent of Russians are convinced of this flawed interpretation of history.

    Historically, such myths have a dangerous precedent--namely, Germany between World War I and World War II. Then, the legend went that Germany was never defeated in the war, but "stabbed in the back" by the Jews and the Socialists. To some degree, the responsible party was the democratic German government, as it was unprepared to publish materials about what really happened before and after World War I.
    Last edited by Hatuey; 08-18-09 at 05:40 PM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

Page 19 of 24 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •