What are your personal opinions towards the Soviet Union?

Question

State The Following :
1 : Answer
2 : Reason
3 : Any Other Relevant Information

This is a survey.

Answer 1

Any opinions on the Soviet Union are null and void as the Soviet Union no longer exists as such. It is now a cluster of sovereign states under their own jurisdiction.

Answer 2

1 : Answer - the Soviet Union pretended to be communist but weren't. Corruption ruined it. That corruption, selling themselves out, is what brought them down... selling out to the USA.

2 : Reason - see #1

3 : Any Other Relevant Information - Prior to its collapse, the Soviet Union had the largest centrally directed economy in the world. The government established its economic priorities through central planning, a system under which administrative decisions rather than the market determine resource allocation and prices...

Answer 3

In the same way China is today, the Soviet Union was a state that felt no one had the right to succeed (with the exception of corrupt leaders). They both are known for murder, espionage, and an abyssmal record regarding human rights. Tell your liberal professors that the next time they try to sell you their b.s. about how bad America is.

Answer 4

The Soviet Union was once a powerful country just like the United States that resulted to the Cold War. It consisted of many republics but due to differences in race, religion, culture and conflicts in government, the union disintegrated and the Cold War ended.

Answer 5

The former Soviet Union brings back memories of corruption and total disregard for the environment. They make the U.S. look squeeky clean when it comes to pollution. Maybe someone should ask all of those countries (especially Russia) to sign the lovely Kyoto Treaty, eh?

What a joke.

Answer 6

certainly one of my renowned sayings is: "background is a collection of events that throughout no way got here approximately, recorded via somebody who wasn't there to witness them...." I take the placement that one and all background is, at ultimate, an knowledgeable guess on the portion of the author. favourite background books, surprisingly textual content textile books, tend to coach national bias based the place they are revealed and who the meant aim audience is. think of approximately what jap textual content textile books ought to declare approximately Japan's invasion of China throughout WW II. I certainly have run into a similar element in Europe with reference to the perspectives of English childrens who graduated from public colleges opinion of the american intervention in WW I in accordance with what they found out at school. (they had have gained whether the human beings hadn't deployed troops...yeah...uh-huh....) serious historians will come to a bring about accordance with as many unique materials as obtainable. They take no longer purely historic bills into attention, yet attempt to returned it up with different (actual) evidence amassed via archaeologists and at the instant biologists (monitoring DNA evidence into the distant previous). Eyewitness bills are notoriously unreliable. Ask any cop in the international who has extra then one witness to a criminal offense how far they have confidence such comments. nonetheless, an honest student will attempt to come to an honest end. although you will nonetheless get 2 honest historic pupils employing a similar evidence coming to diverse conclusions. regrettably you in addition to mght get "pupils" attempting to push a view and/or time table so each source must be seen with some diploma of suspicion. As a background buff I leaned some time past to in no way have confidence the conclusions of a unmarried author. If i discover the undertaking interesting sufficient to care approximately I continuously attempt to examine diverse materials then draw my own bring about accordance with what I examine. in the top i'm continuously conscious that new evidence ought to replaced my end, and persist with what comes up when I certainly have studied the undertaking to purpose and shop my conclusions precise. i you ought to be open minded (yet admit that i'd properly be exceedingly obdurate approximately some matters)....

Answer 7

The USSR no longer exists. To the extent that you mean modern day Russia, i think they provide a much needed balance to American/British attempts to dominate the international field. That is not to say that they are right, but a political environment in which there is no balance is very dangerous and they provide that balance.

Answer 8

1 It no longer exists.
2 It was based on an unreasonable economic system.
3) I'm glad it is gone.

Answer 9

1. I harbor none.
2. Because it no longer exists
3. Russia is now technically our ally

Answer 10

the soviet union no longer exists, it dissolved years ago. why have an opinion about a dinosaur?