File spoon-archives/nietzsche.archive/nietzsche_2002/nietzsche.0207, message 14


Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 04:12:48 -0500
From: "Kevin Sanchez" <heliogabalus-AT-eudoramail.com>
Subject: Re: scruples for nations


>> The US Empire made every attempt to provoke the Soviet Empire, and >> the US attacked first. In 1919, without provacation, it invaded Russia >> and attempted its overthrow. 

>this isn't correct.. in 1919 the U.S. sent 8k troops to siberia, >for the PRIMARY purpose was the evacuation of the Czech forces >from Siberia, and secondarily to keep watch on the japanese who >were also intervening in Siberia.  the U.S. made no attempt, nor >wanted to overthrow the bolsheviks. 

well of course the calculations were made than an attempt to overthrow the bolsheviks would have been very, very stupid. but the attempt was made - and it still was an invasionary force, which the US certainly would not have tolerated from the Soviets. aggressiveness like this is, in part, what provoked Stalin's empire to go along with the Cold War.

>Stalin used a variety of justifications for his actions, >and very few of them were based in reality.  from show >trials of alleged "wreckers" to wiping out entire >party cadres of the older bolsheviks as excuses to >make up for the catastrophic failures of his series >of five year plans. 

well if i applied this kind of analysis to the US military's action, i'd be called foolish - 'Dubya used a variety of justifications for his actions, and very few of them were based in reality' - i prefer to analyze political rhetoric as defining reality: historical constructivism.

>we dropped the nukes because the japanese wouldn't surrender >short of a land invasion, and as the japanese were putting up >extremely tough resistance in the pacific, the farther they >were pushed back, it was calculated that the U.S. casualties >would have been enormous had the u.s. attempted a land invasion.

a little late in the game to be claiming that japan would have surrender - first, they would have surrendered much earlier on one condition: that their leader stay in a figure-head position; and the US clearly knew this, but maintained its stance on 'unconditional surrender.' - and second, the US had broken the japanese code and was decoding messages since between the japanese ambassador to russia and the russian ambassador to japan: there's several messages way before H & N that indicated Japan would surrender, unconditionally, soon. these messages directly led to Truman's use of the bomb before Japan could surrender - they did this to show Russia who was in charge of the post-war period, and it worked ... until the Soviets developed nukes, that is.

>stupid on both sides yes, but if the soviets built up a nuclear >arsenal and there existed no counter-balance the world would >be a very different place right now.  

bullshit. first, the US did not need this many nukes: there's 20,000 on each sides, enough to blow up the entire surface of the globe many, many times over. second, the US nuclear posture has not change even when the Cold War ended: it still has 2,000 nukes on hair-trigger alert. this indicates that the Cold War itself was just an excuse - when the Soviet Empire fell, and Russia proved no nuclear threat, why didn't the US end this absurd practice of Launch on Warning, which brought the world within ten seconds of nuclear annihilation (according to the new york times) when norway sent up a weather satellite with an american-made missle. most of 'detterance' theory was just an excuse to justify expanding military budgets - even the most realist of foreign policy-theorists must admit that.

>the fact that russia is a third world nation can't be blamed >on the U.S.  the corruption of the yeltsin government ran very >deep, and most every state industry  was auctioned off >to various oligarchs (friends of yeltsin and his family) from >anywhere between 2% - 10% of their market value.  gazprom is 
>probably the best example. a 400 billion dollar company, owning >most of the worlds natural resources, and  auctioned off >to friends of yeltsin for the grand total of 220 million (if>i remember accurately) to friends of yeltsin.  the forced paced of the>early 90's economic reforms, which were badly planned, eflated the>value of the ruble so  heavily that the average russian's life savings>became worthless almost  overnight.the so called "vouchers" program,
>where russian citizens were supposed to given  shares in former state >industries also failed miserably.  i should know  because my >mother-in-law still has a bunch of them, and they aren't worth >the paper they are printed on. 

well the corrupt russian government was exploited on both sides - US investors made a great deal of money too, and were happy to create the illusion of a democratic russia if it was good for business. yeltsin was US-supported, remember.


Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com


	--- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005