How will WW3 start?

[Mitchell04]

Russia would never ally with North Korea again because the only reason they supported them during the war was to aid the spread of communism.

 

They would have nothing to gain and everything to lose by supporting north korea in a world war, Given the option they would probably attack north korea instead of risking war with the U.S.

 

Even China is on America's side when it comes to policy north Korea. Kim Jong IL has no influence on the outside world and no-one would risk world war to defend him.

[marharth]

Russia would never ally with North Korea again because the only reason they supported them during the war was to aid the spread of communism.

Many people in Russia are not satisfied with the current form of government and wouldn't mind going back to communism, many people want communism back.

[csgators]

Russia would never ally with North Korea again because the only reason they supported them during the war was to aid the spread of communism.

Many people in Russia are not satisfied with the current form of government and wouldn't mind going back to communism, many people want communism back.

 

If you ask any Russian that lived through the Soviet Union they will tell you that they never lived under Communism, they were always one step away from it. It was a never ending propaganda campaign by the Soviet government upon it's own citizens. The main problem (among many) with Communism is that is in fact unachievable for a variety of reasons and always breaks down into a totalitarian situation. In my opinion Communism is totalitarian by nature anyway so it's a non-starter for a viable government I would wish to live under.

[Harbringe]

Russia would never ally with North Korea again because the only reason they supported them during the war was to aid the spread of communism.

Many people in Russia are not satisfied with the current form of government and wouldn't mind going back to communism, many people want communism back.

 

Yes many do , a majority , not nearly and those who do are older Russians remembering past glories , the generation that is replacing them will never go back to communism

[marharth]

Russia would never ally with North Korea again because the only reason they supported them during the war was to aid the spread of communism.

Many people in Russia are not satisfied with the current form of government and wouldn't mind going back to communism, many people want communism back.

 

If you ask any Russian that lived through the Soviet Union they will tell you that they never lived under Communism, they were always one step away from it. It was a never ending propaganda campaign by the Soviet government upon it's own citizens. The main problem (among many) with Communism is that is in fact unachievable for a variety of reasons and always breaks down into a totalitarian situation. In my opinion Communism is totalitarian by nature anyway so it's a non-starter for a viable government I would wish to live under.

I guess a certain event would need to happen before russia would go against the US then.

 

Communism is not really totalitarian by nature, true communism doesn't even require a leader.

[Aurielius]

Communism is not really totalitarian by nature, true communism doesn't even require a leader.

LOL, where do you come up with these gems? Lets us review the major communist states: USSR...totalitarian, Red China ..totalitarian, North Korea ..totalitarian. As for my inclusion of Red China in the group, to the apologists I have two words.... Tienanmen Square.

 

OK... lets review the quasi communist states: Tito's Yugoslavia ,the former eastern block states of East Germany, Romania, Bulgaria, Poland...hmmm more totalitarian regimes. Did you cut class in History along with Civics? I'm willing to give you Vietnam as more nationalist than totalitarian . I omitted Czechoslovakia and Hungary because they tried really hard to free themselves of their governments and paid a heavy price for their attempts, but the regimes in power at the time were totalitarian also.

 

In any of these former regimes they would lock you up as soon as you spoke your mind openly. There is a reason why they are not current, it's called a failed ideology. That leaves us with the only hard core survivors... Red China and North Korea and if they loosen their grip even slightly they too will be in the ash bin of history.

 

The only true communist ideology is Roman Catholicism if viewed from an early church perspective and what would you call the Pope...seems he might just be a leader. I am sure one or two Communist advocates will pop up and lecture me on the true nature of communism of how enlightened it would be if only it was practiced in it's true form but it NEVER has been so forgive me if I don't believe it pragmatically possible. I await with droll amusement the rebuttals which I am sure will be coming.

Edited April 20, 2011 by Aurielius

[Kendo 2]

Hmph, and I always thought one of the benchmarks of Socialists were dictators. All of those snappy uniforms and missile parades make for great news footage. Nothing like seeing girls in sailors suits goose stepping for the cameras. GOOD TIMES FOR ALL!

 

For Communism (Socialism on a global scale) or Fascism (Socialism on a national scale) to work without Il Padron kind of seems far-fetched. I mean, come on, who in their right mind is going to work hard for no reward (other than not being shot), live in a block apartment, eat sawdust bread and smile when the State Police drags away one of their family members. Communism/fascism/socialism all suck, are unsustainable in the global economic theater, and the governments that profess to follow those doctrines are the governments that start wars. Social justice types can point at America and all of its evil ways and pretend it will be the cause of the next world war. Too bad history doesn't reflect that stance. Outside of a few instances, the majority of American involvements in foreign wars were....now wait for it...responses to socialist/marxist/fascist/communist threats against our allies. But that's okay. If America is involved in the next world war I know who's going to be on the winning side. Not that history won't show that either. And if there is a chance we might lose... :nuke:

 

EDIT:

Damnit, Aurielius. You beat me to it. :laugh:

 

And I hate to think that my tax dollars paid for the naps some people took during Government and Civics classes. Read some of the 'knowledge' spouted in this thread... :wacko:

[marharth]

Seems like quite a few people haven't read the communist manifesto...

 

True communism is described in that. It has nothing to do with a leader and is not totalitarian.

 

Communism does not require a leader, but due to human behavior now it needs someone to lead it in order for it to work.

 

The leader may or may not be corrupt, and the leader may or may not have a strong beleive system.

 

Communism may lead to a totalitarian state, but it is not a totalitarian state at its root.

 

 

Also if your so intellectually superior, why can't you reply to a single thing without being rude?

Edited April 20, 2011 by marharth

[Aurielius]

Seems like quite a few people haven't read the communist manifesto...

True communism is described in that. It has nothing to do with a leader and is not totalitarian.

Communism does not require a leader, but due to human behavior now it needs someone to lead it in order for it to work.

The leader may or may not be corrupt, and the leader may or may not have a strong beleive system.

Communism may lead to a totalitarian state, but it is not a totalitarian state at its root.

Also if your so intellectually superior, why can't you reply to a single thing without being rude?

 

Thanks, but actually have studied Communism, Socialism and their advocates... Marx, Claude Henri de Rouvroy, Friedrich Engels, Thomas Hodgskin, Ferdinand Lassalle and others that are lost to memory....you might give it try too.

Please cite one.... just one leaderless communist state. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and when cooked tastes like a duck...then it might just be a duck. What level of amalgamation of power in a dictatorial totalitarian regime is enough to qualify on your political litmus scale?

 

Last but not least if you would not provide such a target rich environment, then satire would not be so easy. Only a fool thinks himself 'de facto' intellectually superior and usually the sudden stop after the fall from great heights brings them to the realization that there is always someone smarter than themselves. But like the two natives running away from the lion I don't have to be faster than the lion just faster than the other native.

 

Think, draft post, check sources, edit, preview, re edit ...then post, that would shield you more than you have been in the past, just some friendly advice.

[marharth]

Seems like quite a few people haven't read the communist manifesto...

True communism is described in that. It has nothing to do with a leader and is not totalitarian.

Communism does not require a leader, but due to human behavior now it needs someone to lead it in order for it to work.

The leader may or may not be corrupt, and the leader may or may not have a strong beleive system.

Communism may lead to a totalitarian state, but it is not a totalitarian state at its root.

Also if your so intellectually superior, why can't you reply to a single thing without being rude?

 

Thanks, but actually have studied Communism, Socialism and their advocates... Marx, Claude Henri de Rouvroy, Friedrich Engels, Thomas Hodgskin, Ferdinand Lassalle and others that are lost to memory....you might give it try too.

Please cite one.... just one leaderless communist state. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and when cooked tastes like a duck...then it might just be a duck. What level of amalgamation of power in a dictatorial totalitarian regime is enough to qualify on your political litmus scale?

 

Last but not least if you would not provide such a target rich environment, then satire would not be so easy. Only a fool thinks himself 'de facto' intellectually superior and usually the sudden stop after the fall from great heights brings them to the realization that there is always someone smarter than themselves. But like the two natives running away from the lion I don't have to be faster than the lion just faster than the other native.

 

Think, draft post, check sources, edit, preview, re edit ...then post, that would shield you more than you have been in the past, just some friendly advice.

Communism has always led to a totalitarian system in our history, that is true. I am simply saying at its root it is not a totalitarian system.

 

If everyone was able to work together for the greater good without someone forcing them or brain washing them, it might end up working without a leader one day.

 

Its not communism that is totalitarian, it is the lack of human ability to work together without a common leader mixed with communism.

 

What I don't think you understand is that you think you are right, while I think I am right. If we agreed we would not be debating.

 

You can claim I am wrong and attempt to make fun of what I said based on your opinion. You beleive you are overwhelmingly correct and I am just plain out stupid.

 

The thing is, it goes both ways. I choose not to satire everything you say and make fun of it based on my opinions, but I chose not to since its disrespectful and weakens my argument.

 

I think it would be a better idea to open a new topic for the second part, or continue it in PM.

Edited April 20, 2011 by marharth