The Soviets invaded Afghanistan, a bordering country, after the USA had armed radical theocratic militias with modern weapons. And whatever they did in Afghanistan pales in comparison with US actions in non-neighboring Vietnam. If you want to see the true impact of the USSR in central-asian countries vs that of the west, why don't you compare the Human Development Index of Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan (ex-Soviet republics) to that of Pakistan (ex-English colony).
It’s not a “whose worse” competition, but you tankies can’t seem to accept that countries other than the us also do and did bad shit. It’s all whataboutism with you.
Nobody in this thread is denying what the us has done, nor celebrating it. But keep on telling us what a nice guy Stalin was!
There we go, the generic word to refer to everyone who doesn't uncritically peddle anti-communist discourse.
you tankies can’t seem to accept that countries other than the us also do and did bad shit.
But keep on telling us what a nice guy Stalin was!
I'm not a Stalinist. The great terror was terrible, unjustified, and overall a disaster. The collectivisation policy led to chaos and hunger. The democratic functioning of Soviets was seriously undermined. It's just, as much as you probably don't consider that the whole existence of the UK as a country is illegitimate as a consequence of its colonialist history, I don't consider that the USSR as a whole should have been dismantled, and I consider that its overall impact on the world was positive, especially comparing it to what was before and to what came after.
The article doesn’t really dismiss the argument even if the initial paragraphs make it seem like it, it just concludes that it seems unlikely to reach a point where the US could leverage the influence on a future local government, which is true but does not exclude/invalidate the previous proposition
I'm not sure if you could apply to all of them... because, I'm not sure what Kim Jong Un would be doing in the middle east... That would definitely be an interesting one but, that at least applies to Stalin too, it didn't last long, but Stalin absolutely steamrolled Iran there for a bit.
If you wanna know "what would happen" to central-asian countries under soviet rule, you can, well, look at central-asian countries under soviet rule, such as Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan, lightyears away in terms of progress from other central-asian countries with a history of western colonialism like Pakistan.
I'm not. I'm saying both are bad. The others mass murder too. Choosing them out of spite for the first is wishing a similar mass death on someone else. You'd be as guilty of those deaths as liberal voters are for yours.
So if I understand correctly, all 2.5 million in Gaza over 40% children deserve to be slaughtered in the most cruel way possible? Did you even watch the doctor's testimony?
Edit: Also no one is asking you to vote for Hamas. Hamas is not on the ballot. And despite the pinkwashing Israel is a fascist racist country.
Oh I will absolutely denounce Israeli wartime tactics as excessive, as well as call their settlements illegal. The question is whether you will likewise denounce Hamas as terrorists, or will you lift them up as freedom fighters?