were they fucking things up? They were attempting to enact reform in accordance with the popular support for keeping the soviet union together but in a different form, and from the breakaway of the Baltic states which kicked off that drive for reform there weren't any other declarations of independence until immediately after the coup attempt, except for Lithuania which held a referendum right before the august coup with a 90+% support for independence as a direct result of soviet forces attacking them the day after Yeltsin's election who were headed by a general who later perpetrated the august coup. Seems to me it was Kryuchkov & Yanayev who fucked things up, convinced the republics that any reform that would quell their separatist movements would trigger a civil war and the only way their leaders could stave off the possibility of getting whacked either way was to just break away entirely.
tldr; the people who did the coup against gorbachev & yeltsin were also the people who were driving the union into collapse. The month before they attacked parliament to stop the vote to keep the union together from being enacted (& succeeding) they were in lithuania shooting nearly a thousand civilians and causing lithuania to break away.
& I dont like any theory that prescribes the power to predict the future to Bush. I think he supported both sides so he could claim to have opposed whichever side won. If he supports one side publicly then provides their enemies material support in secret, if they lose he can reveal his material support and claim the support was just posturing, if they win he can sweep the material support under the rug and claim the denouncement was the real deal. Or some order of those words, I'm too tired to check that I phrased that correctly
also I just wanted to say, I think this is the first time I've talked to anyone about the Soviet Union & mentioned an event they werent studied up on and they just admitted that they didn't know about instead of committing whatever cognitive dissonance they need to fold that event into whatever narrative they're trying to propagate at the moment without actually looking it up. It's... it's almost like... I'm free of reddit? Oh my god is this what it feels like to be free of reddit???
It really is nice to be surrounded of cool people.
Btw, when in r*ddit talking about, basically anything, you have 99% of chance of being interacting with a dipshit, so in that case I would stan the soviet union despite not knowing shit about it. Among cool people, of course shit is complicated and we can shit on everything together.
They knew Gorby and Yeltsin were fucking things up, so a coup against them is not good news
were they fucking things up? They were attempting to enact reform in accordance with the popular support for keeping the soviet union together but in a different form, and from the breakaway of the Baltic states which kicked off that drive for reform there weren't any other declarations of independence until immediately after the coup attempt, except for Lithuania which held a referendum right before the august coup with a 90+% support for independence as a direct result of soviet forces attacking them the day after Yeltsin's election who were headed by a general who later perpetrated the august coup. Seems to me it was Kryuchkov & Yanayev who fucked things up, convinced the republics that any reform that would quell their separatist movements would trigger a civil war and the only way their leaders could stave off the possibility of getting whacked either way was to just break away entirely.
You are fooling yourself if you think I knew anything you just mentioned. Idk, being supported by The Big Satan is a kiss of death to me.
tldr; the people who did the coup against gorbachev & yeltsin were also the people who were driving the union into collapse. The month before they attacked parliament to stop the vote to keep the union together from being enacted (& succeeding) they were in lithuania shooting nearly a thousand civilians and causing lithuania to break away.
& I dont like any theory that prescribes the power to predict the future to Bush. I think he supported both sides so he could claim to have opposed whichever side won. If he supports one side publicly then provides their enemies material support in secret, if they lose he can reveal his material support and claim the support was just posturing, if they win he can sweep the material support under the rug and claim the denouncement was the real deal. Or some order of those words, I'm too tired to check that I phrased that correctly
Ah, makes sense yes.
also I just wanted to say, I think this is the first time I've talked to anyone about the Soviet Union & mentioned an event they werent studied up on and they just admitted that they didn't know about instead of committing whatever cognitive dissonance they need to fold that event into whatever narrative they're trying to propagate at the moment without actually looking it up. It's... it's almost like... I'm free of reddit? Oh my god is this what it feels like to be free of reddit???
deleted by creator
It really is nice to be surrounded of cool people.
Btw, when in r*ddit talking about, basically anything, you have 99% of chance of being interacting with a dipshit, so in that case I would stan the soviet union despite not knowing shit about it. Among cool people, of course shit is complicated and we can shit on everything together.