Submitted by AutoModerator t3_10zn2xl in history
shantipole t1_j8g7rcx wrote
Reply to comment by quantdave in Weekly History Questions Thread. by AutoModerator
You dragged the US into the conversation and are now attempting to make a point about the USSR based on what the US has or hasn't done. I'm sorry you can't see it, but that is classic whataboutism.
Not engaging in whataboutism would involve you trying to show how the Hungarian and Czech experiences aren't the USSR treating them as de facto parts of it/mere extensions of Moscow's will. How Poland got away with the "Polish October" in 1956 might be a good place to start. You'll also want to explain away things like overthrowing the Hungarian government that was trying to withdraw from the Warsaw Pact in 1956.
It would also involve addressing how the invasion of Afghanistan wasn't the USSR trying to expand its borders (the second part of my point). You might also want to take a detour to discuss if Imperial and post-USSR Russian grand strategy was actually different from USSR grand strategy, or whether it's consistently been a policy of Russian imperialism.
quantdave t1_j8h7l4r wrote
You were the one making the initial assertion: to apply it to one side but not the other is just double standards.
Had Hungary and Czechoslovakia been de facto parts of the USSR, 1956 and 1968 would never have arisen: that Moscow was reduced to sending in its tanks underlines the limitations of its political fiat. It's for you to explain how Poland got away with its different course: had your claim been valid, that couldn't have happened.
It's also for you to support the claim that in Afghanistan the USSR was "trying to expand its borders". Afghanistan was the last thing Moscow wanted in its territory: it hadn't wanted to go in at all, and only the prospect of a deeply hostile regime on its central Asian border drew it in.
Yours seems a rather absolutist two-dimensional take: intervention = de facto annexation. I invite you again to consider whether this applies to US military actions, and if not, why not?
shantipole t1_j8i7n6p wrote
Good luck with the living under a bridge and demanding tolls. Watch out for goats.
quantdave t1_j8j8aak wrote
So you've nothing coherent to add. Oh well.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments