Would the USA be better of if the Soviets were still around?

>>2184728
You are fucking retarded if you believe anything you just wrote

File: 1474419899909.jpg (72KB, 775x1133px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 775x1133px

>>2184743

How so? Is the USA better off fighting with itself?

I'm not saying the Soviets should have won, I'm saying the Soviets threat would have made America a better place to live in.

Or are you saying the presence of Communism would make America a shit hole?

File: not an argument.jpg (230KB, 598x792px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 598x792px

>>2184743

>>2184728
70s America was the biggest shithhole since the Great Depression

my grandma talked about how her union totally lost its balls and everybody started working on the weekend and double shifts paid under the table instead of time and a half right around the time the Berlin Wall came down

Maybe.

>The Soviet Union would make America better by existing as a common enemy for all Americans

First of all, you're implying the cold war ever really ended. Look at the trade relationships between former communist nations and the surviving communist nations, or how Americans feel about China and Russia now. Americans still feel China and Russia are distant enemies trying to take America down secretly. Just look at this election.

>Afghans would have been forced into state atheism

The Soviet Union's state atheism didn't succeed in anything but creating the most religiously zealous people in Europe. Look at the power of the modern Orthodox Church. This isn't anything new. All they really did was hinder the printing of religious material.

>Somehow would have stopped the migrant crisis

You're once again implying the majority of migrants are from Afghanistan and not from North Africa, Syria, and Iraq

Every country needs a rival or they get lazy

Yes and no

In terms of geopolitics, having a rival superpower might keep rogue elements in foreign locales in line. The Soviets did NOT fuck around with Islamic terrorism. There's a famous incident in the 80's when a member of their diplomatic corps was kidnapped in Syria and the Soviets responded by kidnapping the families of the perpetrators. They mailed a cubic centimeter of their loved ones' flesh until their staff member was released. Ivan did not fuck around nor give a shit about human rights as their war in Afghanistan proved.

But on the other hand, having the Soviets means more proxy wars between the Western democracies and the Iron Curtain. So that's not exactly desirable either.

What's interesting is that a Communist Russia still being around while there's a proto-capitalistic China makes things very interesting.

>>2186225
>but it was so alive and vibrant!

>>2187045
Actually considering the murder rate it wasn't that alive kek

>>2184743
Global rule #6 The quality of posts is extremely important to this community. Contributors are encouraged to provide high-quality images and informative comments.

If you are sad about your pathetic life, go rage on /pol/ or /r9k/

File: 8aae4b679adf320a27aacd2e5659a1a8.jpg (28KB, 236x315px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 236x315px

>>2184728
Maybe not for the reasons you are espousing (most of which I find flawed), but yes, if I could go back in time and have the US backdoor fund the Soviets to prop up the USSR and retain a uniting enemy, I would totally do that.

I grew up during the cold war, and while it's true, living day to day with potential nuclear annihilation was a bit, disconcerting, it made us think a whole lot bigger with an eye to the future (somewhat ironically) and, more importantly, the larger picture.

So many fantastic feats came out of that competition between superpowers. I mean we put a man on the fucking moon. Mankind's best hope for long term survival: the space race itself, was a direct result of that conflict. As is, in fact, the internet you are currently using.

If the USSR had kept going strong, and the USA had to keep catching up, imagine what humanity would have accomplished by now. We'd be on Mars (something we used to predict would be the case by the 90's). We'd be having proxy wars over asteroid mining rights. We'd have genetically engineered soldiers and SAI's galore, as well as all the non-war oriented tech all that generates (cures for nearly every condition and disease, etc). All because each side believed there was a grand enemy of equal power, and maintaining that balance of power was critical to their survival, each reinforcing that belief each time the other made yet another entry in the constant technological breakthroughs.

It would have been grand.

But alas, now we're just thinning out or iphones, and cleaning up after and picking on the towel heads we used as pawns in that great endeavor. (Albeit, probably as a result of believing too many of our own lies.)

>>2186982
Americans don't feel that way. A liberal controlled media spread that narrative. If your average American though Russian commies under their bed were plotting to enslave them they wouldn't have voted for Trump.

>>2187149
From a strategic point of view, they still do, or at least, the folks in charge of foreign policy do. That may change with Trump, but most of the conflicts the US have gotten involved with since the end of the cold war, have really been a continuation of the cold war, including Syria ( hosting one of Russia's few warm water naval bases), Crimea (their main artery to warm waters), Turkey (the gatekeeper of said), and the various operations intended to prevent the BRIC from becoming a threat to the USD. ...Of course, most of the rest of the conflicts are merely fallout from various shortsighted efforts during the cold war, but that's neither here nor there.

As Russia becomes more powerful and edges closer to regaining its former glory, there will undoubtedly be more conflict in the future. This is why, up until now, the US has maintained a policy of containment in regards to Russia.