English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-03-03 21:30:12 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities History

9 answers

The arms race between the USSR and the USA was a waste of the world's resources and, although the USSR hadn't the endless funds that America squeezes out of the rest of us, they managed to keep up with them. Which is why the USA in the end had to support Muslim fanatics in Afghanistan to weaken and ultimately bring down the Soviet Union. Brilliant planning on America's part. Only they are not finding it so easy to dismiss the same fanatics whom they called freedom fighers when it suited them. So the arms race was just a waste of money but it did hold the two superpowers in check.

2007-03-03 22:32:05 · answer #1 · answered by checkmate 6 · 0 0

Armaments race (Sabre-rattling. Obs.)- is an euphemism invented by the 20th century diplomacy to denote a mode of the military powerplay between opposing states. (US and USSR mainly; even though Israel and some of its neighbours, India and Pakistan, China and Taiwan, Yemen and Egypt, Iran and Iraq had similar scenarios.) The stand-off is usually unfolded by the increase of the budgetary appropriations to the military industries to build up Armed Forces for an escalation of the political or/and the economical pressure on the opponent without getting into all open bloody war associated with human casualties. The stand-off can occure only if there is a conflict of interests, and only between comparable power players of the political game. If any of the players got a way ahead of the other, the advanced one wouldnt mind to wage a war conflict because it has no fear of retaliation and is confident that it can get away with anything.
I hope I've not scared you to death and it hasnt come to you as The Revelation. Many things are getting cristal clear if they named properly.
The expression "Armaments Race" belongs to the vocabulary of the Cold War Era 1948-1998. Nowadays we can hear other euphemisms: Strong Military, Asymmetrical war, Adequate Responce, Preventive Strike, use your own creativity...
As for the second part of the question: why did it cause problems? I think the Arms race took unimaginable amounts of financial resourses from communities(US-USSR). But at the very same time it was a blessing, because living under the threat of assured mutual nuclear annihilation Europe had managed to keep peace for 60 years, for a change...
By the way, USSR administration called it "The Restraint" (of the opponent military initiatives) Policy.
So , basically there was a powerplay between The Racers and The Orderly. You're supposed to smile here :)
Bye!

P.S. By the way, what country was ahead of the other in the arms race depends on who you're listening to. Non-organic search engines based on advertisements (like google) tell us only one side of the story.

2007-03-04 02:11:52 · answer #2 · answered by Ganzer 1 · 0 0

Following WWII, the US and Russia got into an arms race under the guise of self defense. Each built up weapons, bot regular and those of mass destruction, in order to be prepared for an attack by the other. It caused problems because it was VERY expensive and cost both countries far too much money. Interestingly enough, the Russian economy suffered so much from the strain on accumulating arms, that Gorbachev was forced to deal with President Reagan in dismantling arms. In some important way, the arms race led to the downfall and breakup of the Soviet Union.

Chow!!

2007-03-04 01:54:23 · answer #3 · answered by No one 7 · 0 0

as per rooerskine's answer but the one that gets talked about the most happened during the Cold War so try searching under that. Russia & USA continued to compete for decades - racing to the moon, propaganda (eg. Russians portrayed as the 'baddies' in US movies etc (The Hunt for the Red October, Air Force One))

2007-03-03 22:02:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It's when two military groups compete against eachother for supremmecy; through means of weapons(arms).
see source for more

2007-03-03 21:42:45 · answer #5 · answered by Roo 5 · 0 0

I will try and explain in simple terms.....
Lets go back to the stone age..... you are at loggerheads with some other person, so you build a pile of stones to throw at him
in case he attacks you.......He realises that you have collected more stones than him and you could win the battle.....So....He goes out and collects more stones.....Then you realise what he has done so you go and collect more........Now lets come back to modern days.......To obtain these stones you have to pay for them.........Where does it stop???????? I hope this answers your question......

2007-03-04 00:56:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

let's see lots of money, lots of shiny new guns, a clash of ideals - no can't possibly see what harm that could lead too!

2007-03-03 22:47:20 · answer #7 · answered by jefferytaylor_uk 3 · 0 0

dont know what it is sorry but it is in the new fall out boy song?!

2007-03-03 21:34:36 · answer #8 · answered by Em 2 · 0 0

Please see link below !

cheers

2007-03-03 21:34:10 · answer #9 · answered by Billy 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers