Perhaps it was "cold" between the Soviets and the US directly, but otherwise I think not. How shall we classify the Korean War, Vietnam War, Afghan War (1979), misc US interventions in Central and South America, US support of Chinese nationalists fighting Mao Ze Dong? Where not those conflicts all products of the "Cold War".
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|6997
No nukes I believe is the key, when that was the biggest fear. Lukewarm at best.
The cold war was fought with Proxy Wars.
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|6997
There has been only one war that saw the use of Nuclear weapons. Shall we call every other war Lukewarm then?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
No nukes I believe is the key, when that was the biggest fear. Lukewarm at best.
Relatively yes.Superior Mind wrote:
There has been only one war that saw the use of Nuclear weapons. Shall we call every other war Lukewarm then?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
No nukes I believe is the key, when that was the biggest fear. Lukewarm at best.
not just proxy. in korea, US pilots flew against russian pilots once and a while.TheAussieReaper wrote:
The cold war was fought with Proxy Wars.
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|6997
Vietnam, Korea, and Afghanistan ('79) were all fought by at least one of the big two (US, USSR). We were fighting communism directly. Why do we have to be killing Russians to be killing communism?
Last edited by Superior Mind (2008-11-13 15:02:41)
Now your defining "war" as some aircraft combat over another country.usmarine wrote:
not just proxy. in korea, US pilots flew against russian pilots once and a while.TheAussieReaper wrote:
The cold war was fought with Proxy Wars.
The Korean war was a proxy war.
ja.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Now your defining "war" as some aircraft combat over another country.usmarine wrote:
not just proxy. in korea, US pilots flew against russian pilots once and a while.TheAussieReaper wrote:
The cold war was fought with Proxy Wars.
The Korean war was a proxy war.
but it was kept secret by both sides that they fought against each other. for obvious reasons ofc.
You don't have to be killing Russians to be killing communism, and you weren't.Superior Mind wrote:
Vietnam, Korea, and Afghanistan ('79) were all fought by at least one of the big two (US, USSR). We were fighting communism directly. Why do we have to be killing Russians to be killing communism?
The whole strategy the US adaopted was based on prevention the "Domino Theory" that as one country fell to communism, so would the next, and the next after that.
The idea was to stop the spread as much as possible in South East Asia and beyond.
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|6997
Right, the Cold War was something against Communism as a whole, not Russia. So a more fitting name would be "Politcal Agenda Armed Conflicts of the latter 20th Century".TheAussieReaper wrote:
You don't have to be killing Russians to be killing communism, and you weren't.Superior Mind wrote:
Vietnam, Korea, and Afghanistan ('79) were all fought by at least one of the big two (US, USSR). We were fighting communism directly. Why do we have to be killing Russians to be killing communism?
The whole strategy the US adaopted was based on prevention the "Domino Theory" that as one country fell to communism, so would the next, and the next after that.
The idea was to stop the spread as much as possible in South East Asia and beyond.
well or more fitting name for baseball would be "boring as fuck without steroids" but that's hard to squeeze in on TV ads and such.Superior Mind wrote:
So a more fitting name would be "Politcal Agenda Armed Conflicts of the latter 20th Century".
It's called the Cold war and not the Russian war or the US war with Russia for a reason. You keep talking in circles. lolSuperior Mind wrote:
Right, the Cold War was something against Communism as a whole, not Russia. So a more fitting name would be "Politcal Agenda Armed Conflicts of the latter 20th Century".
Read into this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory
And tell me it was only Russian communism the Cold war was designed to prevent spreading. lol
It was cold, Because it never went Hot. And Hot meant US and USSR going mano-e-mano, nukes and everything. And no bullshit proxy nations in between. Just the real deal.
And that never happened.
yet
And that never happened.
yet
Nope, it's called that because there was no direct conflict between the two powers involved.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
No nukes I believe is the key, when that was the biggest fear. Lukewarm at best.
Lowing probably believes America is one of these dominoes that have fallen now Obama is in charge (or about to be, anyway).
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|6997
I'm not talking in circles. You just elaborated what I said.TheAussieReaper wrote:
It's called the Cold war and not the Russian war or the US war with Russia for a reason. You keep talking in circles. lolSuperior Mind wrote:
Right, the Cold War was something against Communism as a whole, not Russia. So a more fitting name would be "Politcal Agenda Armed Conflicts of the latter 20th Century".
Read into this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory
And tell me it was only Russian communism the Cold war was designed to prevent spreading. lol
Not really. You asked how to define all the conflicts fought between the US and Russia while they were not engaged directly, and I said proxy wars.Superior Mind wrote:
I'm not talking in circles. You just elaborated what I said.
Then you said that the cold war should be defined as "Politcal Agenda Armed Conflicts of the latter 20th Century" which it shouldn't.
As everyone else in the thread has said, it was Cold because the US and Russia didn't engage openly and declare war upon each other and formal hostilites and\or a Nuclear weapon was never involved.
The Cold War is a fitting and apt title, think of it as an umbrella of US and Russian sentiment since WWII up until the final SALT treaties.
Riiiiight.ghettoperson wrote:
Nope, it's called that because there was no direct conflict between the two powers involved.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
No nukes I believe is the key, when that was the biggest fear. Lukewarm at best.
There was a lot of "playing chase".
Xbone Stormsurgezz
There you have it folks, Thailand; The defender of the capitalist way of life (In Asia). Look it at, just upright there like a wall. We all owe the Thai's alot otherwise we'd all be speaking RussianTheAussieReaper wrote:
Lowing probably believes America is one of these dominoes that have fallen now Obama is in charge (or about to be, anyway).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c … theory.png
Take it up with my university professors if you don't believe me. Are you trying to claim that every war since that hasn't come to nuclear war is a Cold War?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Riiiiight.ghettoperson wrote:
Nope, it's called that because there was no direct conflict between the two powers involved.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
No nukes I believe is the key, when that was the biggest fear. Lukewarm at best.
Very much so in the nuclear sense...would be stupid to think of it like that considering they didn't exist until recently.ghettoperson wrote:
Take it up with my university professors if you don't believe me. Are you trying to claim that every war since that hasn't come to nuclear war is a Cold War?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Riiiiight.ghettoperson wrote:
Nope, it's called that because there was no direct conflict between the two powers involved.
It was close...Mekstizzle wrote:
There you have it folks, Thailand; The defender of the capitalist way of life (In Asia). Look it at, just upright there like a wall. We all owe the Thai's alot otherwise we'd all be speaking RussianTheAussieReaper wrote:
Lowing probably believes America is one of these dominoes that have fallen now Obama is in charge (or about to be, anyway).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c … theory.png
Wiki wrote:
The Communist Party of Thailand - CPT (Thai: พรรคคอมมิวนิสต์แห่งประเทศไทย, abbreviated พคท.) was a political party in Thailand, active from 1942 until the 1980s. Initially known as Communist Party of Siam the party was founded officially on December 1, 1942, although communist activism in the country began as early as 1927. In the 1960s the CPT grew in membership and support and by the early 1970s was the second largest communist movement in mainland South-East Asia (after Vietnam). Even though the CPT suffered internal divisions, at its political peak the party effectively acted as a state within the state. Its rural support is estimated to have been at least four million people; its military support consisted of 10-14,000 armed fighters. Its influence was concentrated to the North-Eastern, Northern and Southern regions of Thailand.
However, following a series of internal party disputes, changes in international communist alliances, successful counter-insurgency policies of the Thai government and, ultimately, the end of the Cold War, the party disappeared from the political scene in the early 1990s.
Then I'm afraid to tell you you're entirely wrong.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Very much so in the nuclear sense...would be stupid to think of it like that considering they didn't exist until recently.ghettoperson wrote:
Take it up with my university professors if you don't believe me. Are you trying to claim that every war since that hasn't come to nuclear war is a Cold War?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Riiiiight.