DonFerrari said:
If by US you mean congressman and presidents that more often than not look at their own political power interest than anything else and that also have an economy that benefits from war... and of course a population fed with false information about the ever impending risk of annihilation because of war. But please show how looking to the past you see USSR having won and their system being able to generate more progress and richness to the population. Because I think I'll have to repeat it again, the fact of people at the time thinking something is at risk doesn't really make it to be at risk. A lot of people thought there was a possibility of Lula being innocent, that still didn't change the fact that he is corrupt and guilty. |
Uh yeah because risk of direct conflict with the Soviet Union had the risk of world ending nuclear war. How can you deny this?
There was a fair bit of confidence that the Soviet economy would surpass the American economy. Large parts of the world lived under a socialist system, Soviet influence was on America's doorstep. A large percentage of the world's population lived under a socialist system and Third World countries in the Middle-East and India were sympathetic to the USSR. After WW2, communist parties were strong in France (where they won the 1946 legislative election), Italy (where the party was strong till the 1990s), Portugal after the Carnation Revolution, Spain after the fall of the Francoist regime. Military wise, both the US and USSR were more or less equal in strength and ability to project their power globally.
You however have yet to refute any of my points (instead you've actually contradicted yourself) so far but keep backpedaling, why is it so hard for you to accept that you were wrong that "capitalism was not at risk?" Go brush up on your history and try to debate when you know a little more.
We're done here, peace.
