Message from @Deleted User

Discord ID: 344167569642749963


2017-08-07 17:14:08 UTC  

What does this even mean? What non-Vietnamese communist military bases existed in Vietnam?

2017-08-07 17:14:25 UTC  

Why would communists have an incentive to put military bases there?

2017-08-07 17:14:26 UTC  

China was heavily involved fam

2017-08-07 17:14:41 UTC  

source?

2017-08-07 17:14:43 UTC  

lol, why did the ussr overthrow the afghan government?

2017-08-07 17:14:54 UTC  

why did they conquer eastern europe?

2017-08-07 17:15:06 UTC  

'conquer' is a strange word

2017-08-07 17:15:23 UTC  

ask the people in poland how they liked the occupation

2017-08-07 17:15:31 UTC  

More like they promoted socialist insurgencies for the purpose of increasing international scope

2017-08-07 17:15:37 UTC  

or do you call it liberation?

2017-08-07 17:15:38 UTC  

socialists are in every country, like it or not

2017-08-07 17:16:33 UTC  

here's a source I haven't read yet, I assume you're going to read it all http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~lorenzo/Jian%20China%20Involvement%20Vietnam.pdf

2017-08-07 17:16:46 UTC  

sure I will

2017-08-07 17:16:54 UTC  

you get to work on those articles boi

2017-08-07 17:17:35 UTC  

Thinking socialist uprisings were not stimulated by the soviet union is crazy though

2017-08-07 17:17:42 UTC  

I mean you at least know about afghanistan I hope

2017-08-07 17:17:47 UTC  

"More like they promoted socialist insurgencies for the purpose of increasing international scope"

2017-08-07 17:17:50 UTC  

Are you blind?

2017-08-07 17:17:57 UTC  

Did I not just concede that?

2017-08-07 17:18:00 UTC  

don't get angry

2017-08-07 17:19:02 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/308950154222895104/344167568963010581/notanargument.jpg

2017-08-07 17:19:54 UTC  

argument against what?

2017-08-07 17:20:22 UTC  

"Thinking socialist uprisings were not stimulated by the soviet union is crazy though" - you just threw that out there as a non-sequitur

2017-08-07 17:20:29 UTC  

not something I ever denied

2017-08-07 17:20:57 UTC  

We both agree that they did it then

2017-08-07 17:21:17 UTC  

" The relationship between Communist China and Vietnam was
very close in the late 1950s and early 1960s.9 The close connection with
Hanoi, as well as Beijing's revolutionary ideology, would not allow the
Chinese to go so far as to become an obstacle to the Vietnamese cause
of revolution and reunification."

2017-08-07 17:22:15 UTC  

so far the article seems to be suggesting that unified ideology (i.e. forming an axis against US interests in Indo-China) was a more pertinent reason for Chinese involvement in Vietnam than fiscal gain rooted in a socialist praxis

2017-08-07 17:23:11 UTC  

The U.S would say they did the same in Chile and Korea

2017-08-07 17:24:11 UTC  

What's the difference in stopping the spread of U.S ideology or soviet ideology?

2017-08-07 17:24:12 UTC  

you're diverting off-topic now, but what socialist financial incentives overrode ideological solidarity in Chile & Korea?

2017-08-07 17:24:20 UTC  

the US was capitalist before China was communist

2017-08-07 17:24:44 UTC  

because, like I said, US ideology is rooted in international trade

2017-08-07 17:24:58 UTC  

And the socialist one spreads poverty and misery

2017-08-07 17:25:03 UTC  

a communist state, as history has shown us, can exist in a vacuum, at least to a certain extent

2017-08-07 17:25:22 UTC  

Face it, Korea and Chile are better off

2017-08-07 17:25:26 UTC  

Vietnam wasn't

2017-08-07 17:25:28 UTC  

The US demands that all non-capitalist nations be subordinated to global, financial capital

2017-08-07 17:25:34 UTC  

once more, not an argument

2017-08-07 17:25:39 UTC  

Which is for their betterment

2017-08-07 17:25:50 UTC  

The original contention was whether this level of death would exist under capitalism than under communism

2017-08-07 17:25:55 UTC  

You just don't see it as something good, which the results simply do show