USSR or USA?Which one do you favor most?

 

   Well, Mexico has opposed and backed regimes agaisnt US will in the past. But we are not necesarily agaisnt the US.

 

  1.- Guatemala 1905. The guatemalan dictator with the support of the US planned to reunit to Central America in a single nation leaded by Guatemala. Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica requested Mexico's assistance. Porfirio Diaz sent 30,000 men to the mexican-guatemalan border and treated to invade Guatemala , if the invaded to the other central american republics. Guatemala invades El Salvador, but the guatemalan dictator ( Estrada Cabrera ) gets killed in the first 2 hours of combat.

   2.- Nicaragua 1909. Mexico sent a gun boat to central america to rescue to the democratic elected president Jose Zelaya. He was defeated by coup d'etat organized by the US.

   3.- Mexico sent weapons, supplies and volunteers to Spain during the Civil War to bak up the Republican goverment.

    4.- Mexico recognized to the Cuban Revolution goverment after the reached the power in 1959.

   We have tried to keep our own points of view from the US ( till now ). But I vote for the US rather than the USSR.

   Regards

 

None. As we say in Turkish, it's "iki ucu boklu değnek" (a stick whose two ends are covered with sh*t) at the end.

(In response to Styrbiorn)   You can scream capitalism all you want but that dosn't change the fact that  most european nations, especially Sweden are socialist to their very core. http://www.lewrockwell.com/dieteman/dieteman33.html

Also, I�m eager to know the names of all the democratically elected leaders who we have toppled

Edit: No, I'm quite sure I meant Australia. Perhaps you were simply trying to prove a point quickly, or perhaps your just a fool, but either way the statement �...since Australia is situated quite a bit outside the reach of USSR.�is extremely misled. Maybe your part of Sweden hasn't yet received this information, but the cold war wasn't waged in the nineteenth century. The U.S.S.R. was supporting Marxist revolutionaries in ALL parts of the world. They furnished Cuban, Nicaraguan, Indonesian, Colombian and Angolan Communists with weapons and funds. They placed Missile installations in Cuba, 90 miles from Florida. The Soviet arm, as well as the American reached all over the world. The Australian and New Zealand governments understood this, and perhaps that is why they have security agreements with the United States for decades.

Edited by mauk4678

 

  Salvador Allende and the first 9/11 when Pinochet turned the chilean army agaisnt the democratic elected president.

Actually, the article to which the link links  is an   argument against the commonly held beliefe that modern socialist Sweden is an idilic land of communal bliss.      "Sweden is the poster state for those who believe in the power of the government to solve all problems".

  I also will be back tomorrow to comment more on this matter, and with a more apropos  link.

Yes, I am in fact familiar with the Allende-Pinochet happenings. Before I begin I would like to remind you that all United States involvement in Chillean affairs was undertaken by the CIA and was not even made known to the American People untill 1974. Furthermore, this incident is made virtually moot when compared to the clandestine actions of the KGB during their golden days.(If you can remember, the topic in discussion is "USA or USSR, which one do you favor most?"). I know it is most likely a hard concept to understand when your nation and it's government gets to ride comfortably on the wings of a superpower, but when your fighting an idealogical war against a repressive, proselytizing and belligerent political organism such as the soviet union, you rarely have(outside state of the union addresses) the luxury of high and hollow coffee-shop ideology. I'm not certain on what our good friend and ally Sweden was  doing from 1945-1991, but here in America, we had our hands full with the mundane everyday tasks of trying to keep the balance of power in the world, avoiding nuclear holocaust,rebuilding post WW2 Earth, and leading the free world in competitive scientific and spacial exploration to boot.

Perhaps you can honestly say, without duplicity, that when a minority president(36%), who is leading his already polarized and paralyzed nation straight down the Johnny flusher as well as seizing the private property of your citizens and caudling up to the 'fore mentioned "evil empire",  that you would sit back and say "It's the will of the people. Let it be spoken, let it be done".

Some of the finest moments of the critically acclaimed presidency of Salvador Allende:

1)Defaulted all debts owed by his government to foreign creditors.    "Well done Allende! Be your own boss!"

2)Re-established diplomatic relations with Castro's Cuba, directly violating an agreement made by the OAS that no nation in the Western Hemisphere would do so.         &nb sp;  "See that's what I like about Allende, he'l do what he wants, promises be damned!!"

3)Forced wage increases, putting more purchasing power in the hands of the people, while putting a terminal strain on the means of production. By 1972 food production had fallen and importation had risen.                                                                                          "The I.W.W. would be proud of you Allende!"

 

 

Edited by mauk4678

what a productive argument

niether regiemes are prefferable as proven by:

Quote: but here in America, we had our hands full with the mundane everyday tasks of trying to keep the balance of power in the world, avoiding nuclear holocaust,rebuilding post WW2 Earth, and leading the free world in competitive scientific and spacial exploration to boot.

typical overweening american ignorance

and

Quote: I believe everything need however to be cleansed in one massive bloodshed. And we will have to rebuild a new world on a new base.

psychotic stalinistic self-righteousness of an idea that is unatainable

However:

even though the current balance of power in the world is not prefferable currently it is only a passing thing. Superpowers worse than America have held sway for hundreds of years and the world has survived and gone on to prosper.

How will history view the US.....as the greedy dictators of capitalism who doomed the world to materialism.......or as the saviours of democracy and free will...

depends on who writes it i suppose

 

Neither. I am also neutral.

One evil empire down, one more to go.

Originally posted by Beylerbeyi Neither. I am also neutral. One evil empire down, one more to go.

I just wish they'd gone down at the same time, the power balance as it is is very worrying methinks. And it could have been workable if the glasnost had not failed and the USSR had gone a major rebuilding and reform.

It is impossible for me to choose. I despise the USSR and i despise Putin. I also don't like the American way of seeing themselves as some kind of saviors of the world democracy. The Americans can only bring us the habit of hot dogs and coca cola for breakfast and i would rather avoid that. I don't like American culture AT ALL and although Russians have a long cultural history, they haven't brought any of the good parts of it to us either so i wouldn't like none of them majory influencing me.

Everybody talks bad abouth the USSR and i also hate it, but in the eighties it wasn't that bad here AFAIK although i was only 4 or 5 years old when it collapsed. My entire house was built during the soviet times, BUT the building materials were stolen or smugled by friends who worked at "certain places." And, with the months pay my father got as an electrician you could buy up to a 100 books of world literature classics which my grandparents obtained and i am very proud of that. Today i can buy a couple of books a month only. Although in the soviet times, books were artificially cheapened, but that could be done today aswell, books should be at every home. These days we laugh at the stupidity of the soviets or Russians, we don't worship them. The Eastern European nations aren't waiting for the communists return or something as mauk4678 seems to think. Why dou think the Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians formed the "Baltic Chain" in the anniversary of the Molotov-Ribbendrop pact in 1989? To celebrate the unification of the working people?  Europe isn't a socialist haven, and socialism isn't synonymous with dictatorship. Communism, in the right form could be worth of an attempt although it seems impossible today.

 I would rather live in Sweden than in America as far as that discussion goes.