Absolutes

[frank davis]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:

Tom, I must admit you are the most mysterious person on this board for me, in spite of all my good attitude to you. I just cannot understand your motivation. Do you feel pain of every human being innocently killed? Then how about this:
... (Mapra goes on to mention Vietnam War and Chenchen conflict to somehow try to prove how heartless Tom is)
[ February 17, 2003: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]

Also Tom has not publicly shed tears here on the Ranch for the millions dying of AIDS, millions starving in Africa, untold millions who have who have died in Third World Countries from beri beri, the hundreds of thousands who die from malaria and dysentary every year, the millions killed by the cruel Mongols in their conquests, the forgotten few who have died painfully from bee stings, the doctors who's negligence kills more people every year than AIDS in the US, nor even the slighest mention of sympathy for me when I had a brief but scary episode of psorias last month. Truly, Tom's cold heartedness is boundless
[ February 17, 2003: Message edited by: herb slocomb ]

[Mapraputa Is]

Tom, I did not want to insult you.
I said you do not care about Vietnam war because you apparently try to prove that communism in the USSR had to be destroyed because 6 million Ukrainians died in 1930-s. For me, on the same ground the USA could abandon "capitalism" or "democracy" after Vietnam war.
As for Chechen war, I do remember that you participated in that "Moscow hostage" thread, but what you said: "Terrorists are everywhere and no one is immune to them. We can only hope and pray that all the hostages are freed and the terrorists are captured and punished."
From what I read, women who participated in an attack, all had their relatives killed. I wonder, how this did not make you feel at least some sympathy for them.
This Chechen war goes for many years already and this doesn't bother too many people in Russia. There is only one newspaper that has regular reports from Chechnya, almost every week, and all these articles are written by one woman. She is basically the only person in the whole country who takes this problem personally. I remember one her article about a "retired people home" where people were starving. She talked to federal officials trying to get them to send some food, and one of them said why should we do that, according to out data, there are no Russians there, only Chechens. It drives me crazy that nobody cares.
Our society is in a deep moral crisis, and I think, one of the reasons is massive anti-communist propaganda it was exposed to. Many people simply do not believe that anything good can ever happen in this country, so they are passive.
That’s why your anti-communism bothers me. It can be Ok for "inner consumption", but when you export it in other countries, the result is similar to what happened to local population after "white man" came. White men brought diseases they were immune to, and local people were not.

[frank davis]

Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
Anyway, I'm done with this topic. When Map starts insulting me then I'm done.
[ February 17, 2003: Message edited by: Thomas Paul ]

No Tom, not yet. Map always insults just before she gives in .
Really, we've made considerable progress towards proving that communism is bad, capitalism is good, that social truths are possible, and that there are absolutes. Well, one out of five anyway. But look how far we have come, don't turn back now; we've got to see this through to the end for the benefit of mankind or at least to prove we, the Americans, are right, or at least just better.
[Herb exits quickly to don his flame retardent suit]
[ February 17, 2003: Message edited by: herb slocomb ]

[Mapraputa Is]

Tom, will you forgive me?
We happened to be opponents in this thread, but this is historical accident. Our true, genuine enemies are indifferent, cold hearted, disinterested people like Michael Ernest.

[Mapraputa Is]

Originally posted by Michael Ernest:
If nothing else, the sheer word count of this topic is impressive.

Do not worry, Michael, these are mostly quotes and URLs. My own are only insults.
Again, all following quotes from "Turmoil at tiamammen. A study of U.S. press coverage of the Beijing spring of 1989" hey, read it, it's long but good.
The soldiers/govt is not to blame, it was the students fault
I think, to blame are people who decided to use Army against its own population. And this, by the way, was said by Chinese military officers:
"There are growing suspicions," Kristof wrote the following day, "that the army's slowness has more to do with its own reluctance than with Prime Minister Li [Peng]'s." All eight news organizations in the sample took this reasoning a step further on May 21, 22 and 23, with stories about a letter signed by 100 active army officers and a similar one signed by seven prominent retired generals and marshals that was sent to People's Daily and leaked by the students to the foreign media. The letters insisted that the army "must not suppress the people and it absolutely cannot open fire upon the people." To prevent an incident, "troops must not enter the city," they said. These military petitions, reported promptly and accurately, were later widely concluded to be authentic."
The argument sounds similar to condeming people who jump in front of a train and then expect not to get hurt by the train. But soldiers are not trains, they have the choice of whether to kill or not. It may mean their own death not to kill others, but it still a choice.
And why make them to make this choice? Unfortunately, most people aren't heroes - by definition.
I saw on TV how it was in Moscow in 1991. There was a tank, moving slowly. One guy laid on the ground and his friends grabbed him and dragged away at the last moment. Otherwise we wold have yet another victim of "communist tyranny". I am not sure if a driver could even see him, it was so close.
Was he a hero? In a sense, yes. He was seriously going to die, when other people grabbed him, it was already too late for him to jump out himself - he wouldn't have time, and he couldn't rely on other people to save him - how can you know if they would or not.
I came across a URL earlier that mentioned several Chinese army units began fighting amongst themselves. It is possbile some soldiers had enough outrage at watching unarmed students being killed they revolted. I could not find enough supporting URLs to substantiate this however.
This is most likely a legend...
"The Washington Post led on June 6 with the unattributed statement that "opposing armies maneuvered to confront each other... in a power struggle that raised the prospect of a civil war beginning in this capital." There was a sidebar on a tank unit taking up "defensive positions" against other troops. On June 7, the Post reported negotiations among army units to "end civil strife." On June 8, a Western diplomat was quoted as saying, "You've got rival armies out there like dogs, baring their teeth and snarling at each other. But the moment must arrive when one overcomes the other through stratagem or war." By June 9, an "observer" was quoted as suggesting the severity of the split may have been overestimated."
[ February 17, 2003: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]

[Mapraputa Is]

Is it possible the students had some sort of right (we're back to rights again) to be in the public area where they were demonstrating?
I doubt they had. No idea about China, but in Russia groups that wanted to demonstrate had to give to government an application (in advance) with exact time and estimates of how many people are expected to participate. This way government can schedule police forces to be around.
The sequence of events I remember is that martial law was declared a day before there was the tear gas and violence. Martial law may have simply a legalistic option exercised by the govt to break up the protest.
The martial law was declared on May 20, Tianeman Square massacre was June 3-4 -- two weeks later.
Interesting, that I also had the same impression you have, that students were peacefully protesting, and suddenly troops attacked and killed them - this is what was in my memory after all this TV watching. But after some Internet searching the picture became more complicated.
Actually, the students were allowed to leave the square, and many did (they survived, I suppose). This doesn't mean that Chinese government did not use forces to intimidate population and stop protests, it certainly did. It just was less "murderous" and less "evil" than I thought.
"... The hunger strikers then confronted the ragged remnants of the student leadership - Chai Ling, Feng Congde, and Li Lu. They told them that there was no choice but to negotiate with the army. The rock singer Hou Dejian and the economist Zhou Duo, an unlikely pair, walked across the darkened expanse of the square to seek out the officers in command. (8) Chai Ling declined the invitation to go with them. She was commander in chief, she told them; she could not abandon her people.
Two men came forward to meet Hou and Zhou. They introduced themselves only as Commissar Ji and Commissar Gu. "There is only one way the troops will not, by mistake, do any harm to the students in the square while carrying out our orders," they told the hunger strikers tersely. "The students and other people must leave unconditionally. You have until daybreak. The southeast corner of the square has been left open. If you could persuade the students to leave," the officers added, "you will be praised."
http://www.tsquare.tv/chronology/BlackHchrn01.html
[ February 17, 2003: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]

[Mapraputa Is]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
But what I was talking about, "imagine that your set of ideas fits rest of the world just Ok" ...

Here is an illustration:
"How one culture comprehends another is one of the most fascinating questions in modern history. All ideas and images are "cultural productions" in that external events must be filtered through certain conceptual frameworks and reproduced in some comprehensible vocabulary. In looking at another society--its people, history, current affairs--one is, therefore, also trying to understand it in terms familiar to oneself.
Most of the prewar American writers on China came out of a political culture that was liberal, democratic and idealistic. It was no accident, then, that their reports out of China emphasized developments in that country that resonated with these themes. Taken collectively, the China they depicted was outwardly underdeveloped and even backward but not without genuine strivings for change. And change meant a growing alignment with forces elsewhere in the world--above all in the United States--that were pushing humanity to a better realization of itself. At bottom it was a progressive view of history that went back to the Enlightenment but that also incorporated the American Progressivism of the Wilsonian age. In such a framework one looked for signs of change and for evidence that various countries of the world were coming together in an increasingly interdependent international community.
China was taken as a prime example of the Progressive faith. More than Japan or other Asian countries, perhaps even more than the advanced nations of Europe, the Chinese appeared to be susceptible to American reform attempts. This was in part because the Chinese seemed to need American support, but it was also because Americans needed success in China to reassure themselves of the vitality of their national mission. The fate of the two countries appeared to grow more and more intertwined as decades went on, so that this faith in Chinese-American interdependence and approximation reached a climax during the Second World War because it was believed that the bilateral relationship was but one aspect of the worldwide struggle against tyranny and poverty, a struggle in which democracy and justice would ultimately triumph.
At the same time, however, the Progressive faith mandated that one did not condemn China to eternal sameness. Change was bound to come about, but since it could not be generated by the despotic state system itself, it had to be brought about through some agents of reform, whether indigenous or foreign, which would propose alternative visions and seek to move the country out of its traditional ways. They would do so by arousing political consciousness among those hitherto deprived of power and by promising them moral and material support from the outside."
http://www.tsquare.tv/themes/TatTlegacy.html#anchor433578

[Mapraputa Is]

Another one:
It was not a shortcoming to be laid principally at the door of the media, but it may have been an obstacle to American understanding of the unique features and limitations of the student movement, that Americans tend to see their own democratic values mirrored elsewhere in the world. ABC's Jackie Judd remarked, "Americans think others want to be like us." Canadian reporter Jan Wong reflected, "Americans assume that Chinese goals are what American goals would be. I think they assume that they love democracy and the same kind of things." Perhaps any nation tends to see its values projected elsewhere, which both facilitates interest and sympathy and plants seeds of misunderstanding.

[Mapraputa Is]

Is there any real evidence that the Red Cross would deliberately "greatly exagerate" its death estimates? I had assumed that such an avowedly non-political institution that has survived in China since 1904 would not risk its credibility by gross lying on this one incident.
I do not think they mean that the Red Cross deliberately exaggerated numbers, they probably mean other people who repeated these and even grosser numbers. Regarding the Red Cross I do not know how it operates in China. Was their information first-hand or some kind of estimates?
The exact number, whether a few hundred or a few thousand, seems not terribly important since I would call any of them massacres.
From your point of view. Communist leaders probably believed that they did a good thing, because they prevented the country from going to chaos. And frankly, looking at their Northern neighbor... I read somewhere, by the way, that now many people in China think that student's movement was a mistake.
Here is a quote from your own link:
"Ten years later, the rising at Tiananmen Square would be more in the minds of Americans when they thought of China than it would be in the minds of the people in China. People in China were still looking forward to gradual and orderly political and economic progress." Etc.
http://www.fsmitha.com/~fesmitha/h2/ch31.htm

[frank davis]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Our true, genuine enemies are indifferent, cold hearted, disinterested people like Michael Ernest.

How True!
This is the one and only topic that brings all Javaranchers together; we must unite against Michael Ernest!
I've seen him several times lurking along the shadows of this thread; waiting for his moment when the honest combatants have exhausted themselves; then he will pounce on them without mercy like the cruel beast that he really is.
[ February 18, 2003: Message edited by: herb slocomb ]

[Paul Stevens]

It wasn't three thousand it was only one thousand. That's not so bad. Those who stayed got what they deserved. They threw stones at the tanks.
You can't sugar coat shit and make it taste good.

[Michael Ernest]

Originally posted by herb slocomb:

We must unite against Michael Ernest!

Finally, an absolute we can all agree on.

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
From what I read, women who participated in an attack, all had their relatives killed. I wonder, how this did not make you feel at least some sympathy for them.

I have no sympathy for terrorists of any kind. But notice I did say that I hoped they were captured and punished. These women murdered innocent civilians whose only crime was wanting to go out for a night's entertainment.
As far as communism goes, communism is always bad. Show me one country where communists did not murder their own citizens?

[Mapraputa Is]

Communism improves level of living greatly, provides the whole population with jobs, free education and free medical assistance. Only CIA-sponsored betrayals and enemy of folk can speak against communism. That's why communist had to isolate them in comfortable prisons - so they couldn't stop progress.
Unfortunately, CIA and American imperialism succeeded in their hatred toward communism. Now the USSR doesn't exist, economy is destroyed, unemployment level high and there is a war on the territory of Russia.
As for Chechen women, I do not recall them murdering anybody. They were peacefully sitting among hostages with explosives all around their bodies. *They* were murdered.

[Jim Yingst]

Map, if this is another of your attempts to "use your opponent's style of argument against him", beware that your last such attempt (a few weeks ago) mostly seemed to succeed in confusing issues greatly and making it exceedingly difficult for people to figure out what you really meant. Plain language is preferable to being "clever" in a case like this, I think.
[ February 18, 2003: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]

[Mapraputa Is]

Jim, when we use plain language, I am starting to lose my mind.
When a dozen of Islamic terrorists killed 3000 Americans, it was a good enough reason for America to bomb one country and prepare to bomb another. As Tom said in another thread: "I can't agree that the loss of one innocent civilian makes the war unjust. There will be civilian deaths in any war."
But when women who personally lost their relatives participated in terr.act - "these women murdered innocent civilians" and they must be "captured and punished".
To stay sane I have to abandon plain language.
Funny thing, there isn't too much incorrect information in my post, besides "CIA-sponsored" and "comfortable prisons".

[John Smith]

Communism improves level of living greatly, provides the whole population with jobs, free education and free medical assistance

As we the people of America like to say, there is no free lunch. If the government takes half of my pay to provide for free education and free medical assistance, I want to fire that government and use my money the way I want. And what if I don't want education and medical assistance, -- why should I pay for your college and your brain surgery? I don't care about the welfare of your "whole population", just let me be!
Eugene.

[Michael Matola]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Communism improves level of living greatly, provides the whole population with jobs, free education and free medical assistance.

Is such prosperity (self-)sustainable?

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by Eugene Kononov:

As we the people of America like to say, there is no free lunch. If the government takes half of my pay to provide for free education and free medical assistance, I want to fire that government and use my money the way I want. And what if I don't want education and medical assistance, -- why should I pay for your college and your brain surgery? I don't care about the welfare of your "whole population", just let me be!

I'll let you be; all your fellow Americans 'let you be' and let you die when things don't work out for you sometimes, because there's no 'society', no social behaviour, no 'civilization' going on in the USA. I'm quite happy paying 50% income taxes, knowing that people losing their jobs temporarily can use my (and others) money as a stepping stone to get back on track again. I'm quite happy that other people are quite happy paying money just in case I can't manage one way or another temporarily.
I'm quite happy paying money for health care, road improvements, research, etc. etc. because I know that other people are quite happy paying their share. And that's the difference between the European blokes and the 'there's no free lunch' American folks. You're not a society, you're just a bunch of isolated individuals who complain about others not exhibiting social behaviour while in the mean time you exhibit none.
kind regards

[Michael Ernest]

Originally posted by Jos Horsmeier:

I'll let you be; all your fellow Americans 'let you be' and let you die when things don't work out for you sometimes, because there's no 'society', no social behaviour, no 'civilization' going on in the USA....You're not a society, you're just a bunch of isolated individuals who complain about others not exhibiting social behaviour while in the mean time you exhibit none.

What's your point?

[frank davis]

Originally posted by Michael Ernest:

What's your point?

Just one of the many Euro demonstrators that have come out of the woodwork recently; leave him be and he will scurry away soon enough.

[John Smith]

You're not a society, you're just a bunch of isolated individuals ...

Hey, that's exactly what makes this country great. Paradoxically enough, the power and stability of US is based on the ideas of free entrepreneurship, individual interest, self-sufficiency, diversity, and independence from the society and the state.
The last thing I want to do is to be a part of a "society", -- I've had enough of that shit for 20 years under the communists in Russia. I had free education and free medical care, but I feel really nauseated by it. It's just a vomit that the government pushed down my throat, and I feel like throwing it back to the government.
Eugene.

[frank davis]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Communism improves level of living greatly, provides the whole population with jobs, free education and free medical assistance.

Since I can't tell when Map is joking or not, I'll go ahead and reply to this to be safe.
Compare North vs South Korea, compare West Germany vs East Germany (when it was communist), compare Taiwan or Hong Kong with China (before it started going capitalist). In one group of countries, by nearly every standard imaginable, the standard of living was better. Also, the immigration, or attempted immigration, or desired immigration patterns were all in one direction.
Hint : The Berlin Wall was not created to keep people out of the worker's paradise, nor to prevent people from crossing the border into East Germany to get free health care or jobs.
All semi-conscious beings know which countries were in which groups.

They were peacefully sitting among hostages with explosives all around their bodies.

"Peacefully" ? OK, I guess Map was kidding...

[frank davis]

Originally posted by Eugene Kononov:

Hey, that's exactly what makes this country great. Paradoxically enough, the power and stability of US is based on the ideas of free entrepreneurship, individual interest, self-sufficiency, diversity, and independence from the society and the state.
The last thing I want to do is to be a part of a "society", -- I've had enough of that shit for 20 years under the communists in Russia. I had free education and free medical care, but I feel really nauseated by it. It's just a vomit that the government pushed down my throat, and I feel like throwing it back to the government.
Eugene.

I would like to nominate Eugene to be the official Javaranch anti-Map thread responder. He's from USSR like Map, but now Map can't answer him with the insult that he is an ignorant, stupid American (she means native born/educated American)everytime he speaks out against communism. Plus, he speaks from experience on communism, something which Map also claims.

[Jim Yingst]

For those still in need of a clue, excessive generalizations about "Americans", "Europeans", etc. based on the statements or behavior of individuals (or even majorities) are good ways to get this thread shut down too. A few words like "most", "many", and "some" in front of "Americans" or "Europeans", can go a long way towards helping a discussion become more friendly, rather than less. Thanks.

[Mapraputa Is]

Since I can't tell when Map is joking or not
In this case or in general?
In this case I simply repeated communistic propaganda that I was fed from myself being born. Why do you think I was joking?
I would like to nominate Eugene to be the official Javaranch anti-Map thread responder. He's from USSR like Map, but now Map can't answer him with the insult that he is an ignorant, stupid American
Why I cannot?
(she means native born/educated American)
Not necessarily. People can become Americans. This is what supposed to happen to me also, it's just going awfully hard for some reasons...
Regarding "ignorant, stupid American", I explained what I meant, right? I meant not ignorance, but attempts of some Americans (not all, of course) to make the picture fit their vision, and I quoted American journalists who were talking about this tendency. I also apologized for it, and later said that I think American people are better informed and more rational than Russian, but Eugene is free to refute me on this.
everytime he speaks out against communism. Plus, he speaks from experience on communism, something which Map also claims.
You mean "something which Map also has". But my own personal experience was of little importance in this thread, I hope. Another moment, Eugene said in another thread he left Russia 10 years ago, and a great part of my rather complex feelings about communism came from comparing it to what happened next. If Russia were like the USA now -- no question. But it is not, hence my wonderings, if Chinese path would work better.
Communism - capitalism "dichotomy", it is known that some socialistic elements were borrowed by "capitalism". On the other hand, "communism" seems to become more "capitalistic" over time. This is, if I am not mistaken, what was called " convergence". And regarding "individualism-collectivism", some people (like Eugene) probably fit "individualism" model better, some (like Jos) do not like it at all. I do not see any problem here, unless we once again are trying to impose one social model on everybody.

[Mapraputa Is]

8 - 10 million in the period of 1932-1938. Was communism only in the USSR between those years? Wasn't there a civil war in Russia in the prior to 1920?
Are you going to add all victims, or only those killed by communists? Or you would count killed communists as victims of communism? And I doubt it's a good idea to blame communists for victims of Civil War. Otherwise we will have to blame democracy for victims of American Civil War and we will have to admit that democracy kills its own citizens.
Didn't Lenin kill many of his enemies in the 1920's?
The numbers aren't available, as far as I know, but feel free to research...
We know that the Gulags were quite active in periods other than 1937-1938. Do you think Stalin just had them open those two years?
Nope. I have other data that about 2 millions died in Gulag until 1953 . After 1953 repressions were significantly reduced. No way they could sum to millions, and I doubt even about thousands. If you read the quote, casualties of Afghan war were also listed, so it's not only 1937-38.
I love it when people state facts which are so easuily refuted. Did the author of this never hear of the Greek Civil War? Did the author not know that Europeans fought in Korea? Did the author not know that the French are Euoropeans and they fought in Vietnam in the 50's?
I took a quote out of context, but here it is:
"To be sure, no one will miss such by-products of the Cold War as the Korean and Vietnam conflicts. No one will want to replay the U-2 affair, the Cuban missile crisis, or the building of the Berlin Wall. And no one will want to revisit the domestic Cold War, with its purges and loyalty oaths, its xenophobia and stifling of dissent. We will not wake up one day to discover fresh wisdom in the collected fulminations of John Foster Dulles."
I think, his main concern was with geopolitics in European continent, countries fighting other countries, that's why he did not mention Civil wars and Europeans fighting on other continents.
Of course the reason that so few Europeans died in the post-war period was because the US was there to stand up to the Soviet Union.
Who would otherwise invade Europe? After 27 millions died in WWII, and after a great part of industry in European part was destroyed? All what Soviet could think about was another war? Do you seriously believe in it?

[Mapraputa Is]

Hint : The Berlin Wall was not created to keep people out of the worker's paradise, nor to prevent people from crossing the border into East Germany to get free health care or jobs.
Here is an interview with a son of N. Khrushchev.
INT: Did he initiate the decision to have the Wall built, or was this an initiative coming from Walter Ulbricht?
SK: It was different explanations. I heard that it was initiate from the Walter Ulbricht. My father thought, no, it was his initiative. He thought it. Walter Ulbricht pressed him to help East Germany. He thought that really it is the fleeing of the people to the outside of the East Germany is weakening the GDR, that the Western Germans are buying the cheap goods on the territory, weakening the GDR and at last he even asked to send some workers from Soviet Union to work in Germany. And my father thought, whom you asking? And he told, oh we ask not qualified workers and he told, we won the war and now we will send our workers to clean your garbage in your back yard, it's impossible for us. And his idea, if we will stop this fleeing, then the economy of GDR will grow and at last it will be stronger than in the West. It was another mistake, but it was such understanding.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/coldwar/interviews/episode-7/khrushchev3.html
INT: Was the uprising in East Germany in June 1953 a particular cause of worry for your father?
SK: Well... when we talk about that I think in the 1953, my father it was not real cause of worrying of the afraid of. He thought it was the result of our mistakes. The Western countries did not ask to build Germany to pay them back the reparation and we charge Eastern Germany and we bomb everything from them, of course their level of lifes were slide down and it did result, so he decided that after that, we will not charge the reparation, we will use some economical support to them and then they will recover and will go forward. So for him it was the signal that it was something wrong, but something wrong on the short-term planning, not on the long-term planning...
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/coldwar/interviews/episode-7/khrushchev4.html

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Who would otherwise invade Europe? After 27 millions died in WWII, and after a great part of industry in European part was destroyed? All what Soviet could think about was another war? Do you seriously believe in it?

From 1945 on, the USSR had the largest army in the world along the borders of Europe. They ignored their treaty obligations and refused to allow the return of pre-war governments to conquered states within their sphere of influence. They overthrew the government of Czechoslovakia and tried to incite civil war in Greece. They built the largest ICBM force in the world. All the actions of the peace loving workers' paradise.

[frank davis]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
All what Soviet could think about was another war? Do you seriously believe in it?[/QB]

Yes, they thought of War quiet often.
Soviets helped with the arming and planning of the North Korean attack on South Korea 1950.
http://history.acusd.edu/gen/20th/korea.html
http://www.alternativeinsight.com/Korean_War.html
De-classified documents show invasion plans of Western Europe as early as 1951, but of course as a defensive response to an attack ( I had the URL here a minute ago..., if you insist I can refind it).
In 1956 Prime minister Imre Nagy of Hungary announced his country was withdrawuing from Warsaw Pact. Soviet troops invade shortly thereafter. Approximately 30,000 citizens of the city of Budapest were killed. Tanks drag bodies of those killed through the streets as warning to others.
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/hungary_1956.htm
In 1968 Soviets invade Czechoslovakia.
http://www.lib.umich.edu/spec-coll/czech/pg1.html
1963 Cuba is armed with nuclear weapons to aim at the US.
More plans for invasion of Europe :
http://members.cox.net/belovai/Stars_and_Stripes.html
http://www.lib.umich.edu/spec-coll/czech/pg1.html

[Thomas Paul]

An interesting page on Soviet mass murder from 1917-1987:
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE4.HTM

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by herb slocomb:
Just one of the many Euro demonstrators that have come out of the woodwork recently; leave him be and he will scurry away soon enough.

I do beg your pardon? You just proved my point: no civilization is present on your side of the pond at least not between your ears.

[frank davis]

Originally posted by Jos Horsmeier:

I do beg your pardon? You just proved my point: no civilization is present on your side of the pond at least not between your ears.

Whatever happened to "I'll let you be" ?
Jos :
"I'll let you be; all your fellow Americans 'let you be' and let you die when things don't work out for you sometimes, because there's no 'society', no social behaviour, no 'civilization' going on in the USA."
Typically Jos rants and vents, adds little substance to any discussion, stamps his feet, then leaves. His posting in the "anti-Americanism" thread is typical. He claims Americans built Gulags, I ask for documentation via URL and then he jumps to this thread and mid-topic begins yet another Anti-American tirade.. :roll:

[Jim Yingst]

Perhaps you missed my last message, Jos. I tried to phrase it generally, but you may take it as directed at you in particular (though not exclusively by any means). If you want to help encourage all Americans to dismiss your opinions out of hand, you're doing a good job.

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by herb slocomb:
Whatever happened to "I'll let you be" ?
Jos :
"I'll let you be; all your fellow Americans 'let you be' and let you die when things don't work out for you sometimes, because there's no 'society', no social behaviour, no 'civilization' going on in the USA."
Typically Jos rants and vents, adds little substance to any discussion, stamps his feet, then leaves. His posting in the "anti-Americanism" thread is typical. He claims Americans built Gulags, I ask for documentation via URL and then he jumps to this thread and mid-topic begins yet another Anti-American tirade.. :roll:

About those 'Gulags', what else do you want to call those camps where those Taliban folks are kept now for a couple of years? Show me the difference then. I'm not 'anti American' as you proclaim me to be, I'm just anti opinionated radical 'redneck-ism' as is so loudly uttered around here. I lived in Dallas (TX) for a couple of years and again, now, I recognize the same self proclaimed 'absolutism' in this forum, that's all it is I'm argueing against.
kind regards

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by Jim Yingst:
Perhaps you missed my last message, Jos. I tried to phrase it generally, but you may take it as directed at you in particular (though not exclusively by any means). If you want to help encourage all Americans to dismiss your opinions out of hand, you're doing a good job.

Are you talking on behalf of all Americans or are you just proclaiming your own opinion here? I know, it's hard to read criticism targeted against something one feels affiliated with, but it's the fundamental right of the 'criticizer' to utter these criticisms. If 'all Americans' can't stand it, too bad for them; they're not the the 'absolute' truth or whachamacallit.
And besides, I've read and scrutinized all these posts carefully; most of them weren't even worth replying to, hence my lack of replies. But this childish seggragating type of replies targeted towards my person are way below standards; 'all Americans', I've even seen a 'away with him!' reply. Tsk tsk tsk. Time to grow up for some folks overhere ...
kind regards
ps. Have anyone of you ever realized that the USA never fought a war on its own territory?

[Paul Stevens]

Cival War count.

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by Jos Horsmeier:
ps. Have anyone of you ever realized that the USA never fought a war on its own territory?

I see you are a history student. But you flunked out. How about the American Revolution, the War of 1812, and the Civil War? In World War II, we fought in many American territories including the Phillipines, Alaska, Guam, Hawaii, etc.

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by Jos Horsmeier:
About those 'Gulags', what else do you want to call those camps where those Taliban folks are kept now for a couple of years? Show me the difference then.

I would call them prisoner of war camps. And that is what the Red Cross calls them as well. Of course, they haven't been in the camps a couple of years because the war against the Taliban was only fought one year ago. As to the difference, the Gulags were slave camps where millions died. The POWs are not required to do any work and have constant visits by the Red Cross. They are treated well and are well fed.
Here is an interesting article. Perhaps it is the Australians you should be complaining about:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/afghan020130_australia.html

[John Smith]

Mapraputa Is wrote:

I also apologized for it, and later said that I think American people are better informed and more rational than Russian, but Eugene is free to refute me on this.

Ok, here is what I think since you asked for it.
The Russian: Very sceptical (to the point of nihilism) and existential. Disillusioned yet stubborn in his attempts to find the truth at all costs. Perceives "small talk" as a waste of time and favors discussions covering transcendental issues. Has low self-esteem yet mindlessly adventurous beyond the calculated risk. Has a subtle sense of humor that is too sophisticated for a non-Russian to understand. Believes in strong and protective state while being oppressed and often prosecuted by it. Favors emotions over argumentations during the discussions, even though he has a logical rather than artistic mind. He is approachable and easy to make friends. Tends to speak in long, complex, metaphorical sentences, and uses sophisticated words that often obscure the main idea. Has strong opinions and expresses them without the fear of offending the opponent. An atheist. Believes that critisism is more constructive than encouragement. Although hard to persuade in arguments, he has pronounced crowd instincts and easily falls under the influence of new societal paradigmes. Exhibitionist in his appearence, -- the quality of his clothes is much more important to him than the comfort. His security and the sense of well-beign is compromised by his own internal contradictions and his dialectic surroundings. Has low level of tolerance and is easily irritated by non-conformity of other people to a common opinion, including people looks and behaiviour. Tends to blame other people and the government for his failures. Too institutionalized to accept responsibility and to take action. He is an intellectual with a certain contempt for others, especially less educated people.
The American: Very pragmatic and practical, his main drive is his own success. The money and its derivates are the epicenter of all aspects of his life. Extremely competitive and hard-working, he spends 90% of his energy at work. When he achieves the success, he realizes that his higher quality of life doesn't translate into higher happiness, and he gets depressed. His cure turns out to be the persuit of wealth, not the wealth itself. Willing to take calculated risks. Down to earth and self-centered, he may appear as ignorant. He is a reductionist, -- the problems are dealt with one problem at a time, one day at a time. Preoccupied with health concerns (diet, excersize), yet overweight. Has somewhat primitive and superficial sense of humor: he considers "a pie in the face" the best joke. Speaks in short, concise sentences, and uses simple words to communicate the ideas in the most efficient way. Favors and values clarity over metaphorism and sophistication in verbal and written communications. Loves "small talks", -- the conversations about nothing that he believes break the "uncomfortable silence". Views cinematography as pure entertainment, not the form of art, -- the best art movies are not even played at major movie theaters since there is no demand for them. Dresses plainly and comfortably with little regard to visual appeal. Extremely conscious of his freedom in all aspects of his life, especially the freedom of free speech, the freedom of enterprize, and freedom from the government- or society-imposed norms. Despite the eagerness to make a small talk, he is hard to make a friend, as he protects his individuality, privacy, and space. He perceives some seemingly innocent questions and actions as an invasion of his privacy. Claims to be religious, but seems to discard the religious values and traditions easily if deemed impractical or interfering. Highly tolerant of diversity of opinions and cultures in his country, as he is himself a grandchild of an immigrant. Cautious to criticise and to offend the others, he believes that encouragement is more constructive, even if the praise is too far stretched or unwarranted.
Is that fair enough, Mapraputa?
Eugene.
[ February 19, 2003: Message edited by: Eugene Kononov ]