I've always thought of the Cold War as the battle between the US and the Soviet Union. I "fought" in that war from 1975 to 1987. I always believed that we won.
However, that "war" was really just a battle in the larger war between a society based on the rights of individuals, and societies based on the rights of the "collective". In that war, I'm afraid the individuals are losing.
2007-03-11 13:52:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by ML 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
i'm going to have to agree with the no winners answers. and I have news for you. the coldwar? 2 things about it. 1. it was never cold. there were more armed conflicts that resulted in loss of life on both sides than the US Govt wants to admit. the Us lost a lot of pilots over soviet airspace. 2. The cold war is not over. we still spy. they still spy. and anyone who thinks the Soviet Union (or any variation of the former U.S.S.R) dismantled their nuclear arsenal is very much misinformed.
while not an immediate threat there still exists uneasiness and underlying hostilities. But that pretty much goes for nearly every nation on the planet. Everyone hates the US but the US supplies the marines,sailors and soldiers to protect when some country gets invaded. anyway,nukes everywhere, who's gonna strike first.
2007-03-11 13:52:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by molly 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not enough ambition to tackle all of the points but for the first 10:
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
This was never in conflict. After the devastation the use of atomic weapons cause was demonstrated all nations knew that coexistance was the only realistic alternative.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
Only up to a point, as Kennedy demonstrated during the Cuban Missle Crisis. If the only alternative is atomic war it is common sense to prefer ANYTHING else, but the US has always reserved the right of use of nuclear weapons as a last alternative.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
I haven't noticed that the US has unilaterally disarmed, has anybody else? The illusion may exist, but the reality trumps.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
The US has promoted free trade longer than ANY communist state, most of whom only want free trade OUT of their countries, not in.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
Not familiar with this issue or it's outcome . . . .
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
America . . . the easisest touch on the planet. And all we get for it is slaps in the face . . . .
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
And a more democratic China is the result. They still aren't perfect, but then neither are we . . . .
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
And the winner is . . . . Germany! One nation, with a democratically elected government. Yup, we "lost" that one . . . .
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
Aren't all signatories of the nuclear proliferation treaties observing test bans? Too bad we can't get the nut-so non-signatories on board . . . .
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
Some FORMER Soviet block countries . . . . and many are members of or are attempting to become members of NATO and are strong, even ardent at times, allies of the US. . . . much to certain other former Soviet block countries displeasure.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure we won.
2007-03-11 14:22:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by John B 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Western international gained the chilly conflict. The whys variety. some human beings have confidence that protection rigidity spending crippled the Soviet economic gadget and hence signaled the downfall. in my opinion i think this is slightly extra complicated than that. the protection rigidity build-up surely had an effect, however the loosening of tight regulations on the Soviet human beings additionally performed a factor. you are able to no longer introduce freedom into an oppressed society without it having dramatic outcomes. a similar element is now happening in China, albeit without the intense protection rigidity spending element.
2016-11-24 21:20:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course the "cold?" war is not over yet; nevertheless, we've already lost, and most of us don't even realize it. We lost it on June 17, 1963 -The U.S. Supreme court decided to throw God out of our schools, thus allowing the wolves in sheep's clothing to inhabit nearly every public institutional structure. Since that time, our nation has become the #1 partaker and/or marketer of pornography, illegal drugs, the murder of the unborn, evolution, murder, etc., etc., and etc........ AD NAUSEUM
2007-03-11 15:22:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The US space program lost. The people of satellite countries won. Overall the people of the Soviet Union are better off.
2007-03-11 13:37:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by redunicorn 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I do not think it is over yet and regardless of Russia caving in, we have people in our own political parties that are committing acts of treason that, when all added up, COULD cause us to lose. A lot depends on what China does, and Russia (who is still alive and kicking).
2007-03-11 14:15:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by just the facts 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
There was no cold war, there was no cold war, just a war in the cold......Democratic historic record.
2007-03-11 13:40:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There were no winners.
2007-03-11 13:34:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by KERMIT M 6
·
1⤊
0⤋