SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Support the French! Viva Democracy! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (2475)8/10/2003 7:18:04 PM
From: 49thMIMOMander  Respond to of 7841
 
To understand WW2 one must understand WW1, and also some of the reasons for WW1.

This includes the Versaille Treaty as well as the US great depression of 1929.

However, USA got busy at the WW2 end not to lose all of their influence in europe, however, US never got this far north, but did not declare war on us as UK did (what other two-party are you thinkin of, Canada??)

We obviously called the russians all through WW2 about the basic problem, that the finnish gulf was the strategic route to attack St Petersburg.

The WW1 stuff actually got some recent media-attention through the keywords of "power politics" (as well as lousy peace treaties)

However, I have understood these basic issues are only part of post-graduate studies in history and political science in USA, does not fit the regular "good and evil", two-party culture.



To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (2475)8/10/2003 7:32:39 PM
From: 49thMIMOMander  Respond to of 7841
 
Btw, one issue since a couple of years (as it always was) has been what was declassified in US, that Russia had no agressive goals in terms of europe during the cold war, according to CIA.

All that stuff on the "nuclear missile gap", all those russian tanks designed just to occupy europe were kind of just US domestic problems.

Some of it is mentioned in the APA-archive I posted, some probably in terms of the Cuba Crises.