Dictatorships/ evil regimes

Historically there have been many that have grown in power for years, and humanity has had to regret it through Genocide and war. So should we act with force rather than the great UN slap on the wrist. There were many chances to stop Hitler and we did not, how did they not see it coming? And the illusion we "won" world war two is hilarious, Poland was not liberated and the equal evil of communism spread through the globe. Maybe we should have gone straight after Stalin after WW2. We watched Saddam, we have watched Genocide and do..nothing. North Korea and Iran are the same, shouldn't we act before they get nukes? I honestly think ten years down the line we will look back and think why didn't we do something when we had the chance.

I'm not sure what you're on about. World War 2 was USA/Canada/UK/Russia/ect. VS Germany/Japan/Italy/ect. Russia was on our side. Just because a country was liberated by our future enemy (and at the time our friend), doesn't mean we lost the war.

Second of all, the "Good" countries in the world are trying the best they can to stop these countries from acquiring nukes ect. What you have to remember is that while they might have the bombs, most of these countries don't have the power to deliver them. The world has changed a lot since the second world war, and even the start of the cold war. Things are far more complicated than you seem to be making them out to be. I suggest you read up on the subject a little bit more.

First thing we need to understand is "dictator" has not always equaled evil. Prior to the likes of Sulla in Ancient Rome, a dictator was looked upon as a good thing. In these times, a dictator would be appointed for a period of 6 months as a way of "fixing" a problem, and was really no more than an extraordinary magistrate.

What I'm getting at, is just because a country has a supreme leader, doesn't necessarily make it evil.

How exactly is communism evil? Do you even know what communism is?

How exactly is communism evil? Do you even know what communism is?

Communism is a brilliant idea - it's just one that will never, ever work.

Stalin was awesome.

As LostOverThere correctly states, you equate "dictatorship" and the term "evil regime" thus automatically placing your own subjective stance on the topic. Communism wasn't evil, it was just a different ideology. You're clearly a sucker for political discourse.

Also, you can't just go "straight after" states within the international system. The reason why the UN doesn't work is because it's made up of the countries we don't necessarily get on with. The reason why all the proxy wars and shit like that happened during the Cold War and nothing was done about it was because a UN Security Council member (likely USSR, US or UK) would've vetoed any action to do so. It's why places like Kosovo are still a fucking mess because NATO made an illegal intervention which Russia and China didn't approve. Oh, not to mention that going after Stalin, after the most destructive war in history (which bear in mind, he pretty much won for us) would probably be suicide/utterly pointless.

I commend you for trying to raise a discussion but perhaps stick to something you have a better understanding of?

Well, a dictatorship IS considered an evil in our democratically elected nation. Communism, created much evil , Stalin killed 20 million

Well, a dictatorship IS considered an evil in our democratically elected nation. Communism, created much evil , Stalin killed 20 million

Dictatorship ISN'T considered evil in our democratically elected nation. Only by idiots such as yourself who don't understand it.

And communism created no evil. Stalin killed 20 million, he was a commie, therefore communism is evil. He was also male does that mean men are evil? Are Russians evil? What about people with moustaches?

You clearly don't have any clue about communism. I very much doubt you even know what it is. If you ever speak to any older eastern europeans you may be surprised to find out that most of them preferred communism.

Although as other members said that dictatorship does not equate to evil regime, I see Stuwii's point with associating the two words thanks to it's relation in recent years.

But avoiding the dictatorship subject and onto the evil regime, there's a chance to prevent every thing. Heck, there were attempts to take care of Hitler, but they failed. But I feel it mostly comes down to human fear or as I feel in recent times, disinformation as to who the real evil regime is.

Is it the guy perusing nuclear power for his citizens who may or may not be manufacturing weapons with the power, or is it the bigger guy who already had an arsenal full of thousands of nuclear war heads not coming to an agreement about surveilance on the process but instead declares a full out campaign for sanctions against the guy and his people? This is just an example of what I feel is one of the most pressing situations lately that reeks of evil regime. Just an opinion of mine that won't change really.

Not sure where I intended to go with this post, ah well, finish.

If you count the deaths by communism and the deaths by democracy, democracy would probably win it easily.

That's not to say communism > democracy, but you can't just blame a political system for all that is wrong in the world.

Ok in hindsight yes we had plenty of chances to stop Hitler. But are you suggesting that every time there's a chance somebody looks like they might be about to cause trouble we intervene and stop them? Sound a bit like a dictatorship to me. That's the sort of things that those evil commie's did.

Communism removed freedom , which in my books is an evil. And isn't eastern Europe the poorest bit? And the good dictatorship arguement doesn't go too far with me, lots of abuse of power

We helped Hitler in to power because he hated Communism, hated the Russians and was capable of uniting Germany. Without him the Red Revolution would have spread in to central Europe (and maybe beyond). It all went wrong because Hitler knew he was being used, Germany was supposed to be the sacrificial lamb in an upcoming war between Britain with her allies against Russia. We'd have been allied with Hitler's Germany and the majority of the war would have been fought on German soil with majority German blood being spilled.

What I'm getting at there is that we wouldn't have stopped Hitler even knowing what we know now. Communist revolutions in central Europe would have been far too damaging to British power. At most we'd have massively cut the funding we gave him to build his armed forces. That's the thing about our actions in the world, we won't lift a finger to stop even the most destructive of wars if the cons outweigh the pros.

As Communism itself being evil, that's a rather silly notion. Communist revolution tends to be born out of great oppression and tyranny. The people have to become so fed up with being treated like dirt that they are willing to throw away their lives to bring down the establishment and take the power themselves. While the Revolution breeds evil acts it isn't in itself evil.

Communism removed freedom

OK, ninja edit.

That is just plain wrong.

I'm assuming you're referring to Stalin's Russia there? Don't tar an entire movement with the acts of a paranoid Dictator. Stalin did what he did because he believed it to be the only way to keep Russia strong enough to see off any direct attack by the US. He was probably right.

Communism itself doesn't remove people's freedom. Maybe read up on the birth of communist Russia and compare people's liberties before and after the revolution? I seriously doubt you'll find that the people were better off under the Tsars.

Historically there have been many that have grown in power for years, and humanity has had to regret it through Genocide and war. So should we act with force rather than the great UN slap on the wrist. There were many chances to stop Hitler and we did not, how did they not see it coming? And the illusion we "won" world war two is hilarious, Poland was not liberated and the equal evil of communism spread through the globe. Maybe we should have gone straight after Stalin after WW2. We watched Saddam, we have watched Genocide and do..nothing. North Korea and Iran are the same, shouldn't we act before they get nukes? I honestly think ten years down the line we will look back and think why didn't we do something when we had the chance.

How stunningly ethnocentric.

The world isn't black and white. Wake up.

And isn't eastern Europe the poorest bit?

Well they became a lot poorer since 1989.

Well they became a lot poorer since 1989.

I would say it's the reverse - since joining the EU the fuckers have been swimming in money. Places like Lithuania actually rank higher than the UK when it comes to standard of living for some ridiculous reason!

I would say it's the reverse - since joining the EU the fuckers have been swimming in money. Places like Lithuania actually rank higher than the UK when it comes to standard of living for some ridiculous reason!

Wrong. A few people got richer. The majority got a hell of a lot poorer and most fled to the UK / France / Spain etc. My girlfriend is from Latvia and the country is a mess. There are literally NO jobs in the Baltic region and the region is still hella poor. All that joining the EU did was free up access to the Eastern European markets for Western Europe and it has done very little for the average person.

I did my dissertation on the Soviet collapse and the general consensus among my tutors and the reading material that shaped my final piece was that communism > capitalism. But because of Stalin's brutality and general idiocy he destroyed it from the outset to the point that it could never, ever be what it wanted to be or even professed to be. It was nothing close to communism, however the ideas implemented by both Khrushchev and Gorbachev respectively were admirable in what they attempted to achieve. Ironically by allowing greater freedom in the USSR, it was in fact these two, Gorbachev in particular, which eventually brought it crashing to the ground because once the Soviet's learned what had happened in the past they decided that this system was wrong for them (i.e. crushing of freedom in the past, Stalin's brutality). Couple that with some corrupt high ranking government officials who knew they could get very, very rich by tearing down communism putting the pressure on to end it and the results are written in history.

If you go to Russia today, very little has changed. People are a hell of a lot poorer and the FSB are essentially the new KGB. The was of life has changed very, very little, it is still one of the most 'un-free' countries in the Western world. All that's changed is a few oligarchs have made a killing in the tele-communications, oil and finance industries and instead of living expenses being 2.5% of the average income, they are above 50% and instead of a job being a RIGHT, unemployment is around 10% (13 million).

Capitalism roooolez.

I'm assuming you're referring to Stalin's Russia there? Don't tar an entire movement with the acts of a paranoid Dictator. Stalin did what he did because he believed it to be the only way to keep Russia strong enough to see off any direct attack by the US. He was probably right.

Ninja edit = correct. It is truly ASTOUNDING how Stalin transformed Russia from an agricultural mess, sparsely populated with peasants into a global superpower in just 20 years.

Final point on this: The USSR could never ever prosper or achieve what it set out to achieve because of the truly MASSIVE amount it had to spend on the arms race with the US, because the US was paranoid that communism would take over the world and un-seat them as the global leaders. Check out the videos on Youtube for the 'bay of pigs' to get an understanding of the paranoia and stupidity of the US at this time. Also the Afghanistan war 1970-79... The USSR tried to support a communist uprising, the US gave weapons, arms and funding to the people trying to stop it... The Taliban Oh history, you are so cruel.

Communism in most forms led to pre assigned jobs, and no elections. Communism was not a benefit to our world. Neither is the American capatlist approach. I truly believe neither works

Communism in most forms led to pre assigned jobs, and no elections. Communism was not a benefit to our world. Neither is the American capatlist approach. I truly believe neither works

Communism has never been embraced or experienced by this world, as many of us have already stated, only twisted forms of it usually achieved by military coups.

The idiocy spouted by some on these forums is so funny. To even contemplate communism as a workable alternative is laughable, but very dangerous.

Wrong. A few people got richer. The majority got a hell of a lot poorer and most fled to the UK / France / Spain etc. My girlfriend is from Latvia and the country is a mess. There are literally NO jobs in the Baltic region and the region is still hella poor. All that joining the EU did was free up access to the Eastern European markets for Western Europe and it has done very little for the average person.

I wouldn't go as far as to say I'm completely wrong and instead, I'm partially wrong (what I get for making a bold statement on these forums). As per my example, Lithuania is a country that does not fit the general mould and if we're talking all former communist states, well Poland is an example of a country that has most certainly risen from the ashes, to take on quite a significant role in the EU.

But yes, it's a case of some good and some bad. Much like every other economic region. And the EU did more than just free up access to markets - it allowed for greater freedom of movement, aka movement of labour, which, yes, means people "flee" to the more developed countries but also means that work across borders is possible. Not to mention, it opens the places up to tourism and easier, cheaper exportation to other EU members. As you correctly say, not everyone got richer but I'm sure it's been more than a few, hence why the baltic economies have been growing at a ridiculous rate. Well, until the banking crisis (which I believe hit Latvia pretty darn hard!)

Again, I guess we can't really look at the region as a whole and rather we have to examine each state independently.

Communism in most forms led to pre assigned jobs, and no elections. Communism was not a benefit to our world. Neither is the American capatlist approach. I truly believe neither works

"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others we have tried"

If you have a better idea for a stable, effective government, by all means, enlighten us. But I highly doubt you have one.

While I don't agree with the current concept of Communism, I don't think it's evil by itself. Rather, an evil government is evil, regardless of what it claims to be. Ditto for ineffective governments.

As for intervening in evil/warmongering countries... How is that supposed to work? Intervention by third parties tends to worsen the situation in those countries, more often than not. The Taliban have already been mentioned, Iraq is still a mess, the countries that fought civil wars for the US/USSR haven't fully recovered yet, etc.

Also, invading a country to prevent it from starting a war sounds counter-productive to me. Hypocritical, even.

The idiocy spouted by some on these forums is so funny. To even contemplate communism as a workable alternative is laughable, but very dangerous.

Of course it is workable, but requires a global context which will never be achieved in our lifetimes. When it is up against a system which promises more, even if most can never achieve it then people will always want what they cant have. We live in a material world, where everything is given a value and until this system is overhauled communism is impossible to achieve. Until we put the value in people and society over money and 'stuff' we will be stuck in this state until we all kill each other.

Amen to that.