no hardline coup in USSR
- Thread starter KJM
- Start date
A few months is all that really changed, the old system was dying, and the coup attempt was simply a last-ditch effort by those that didn't want to accept the verdict of history...
I'm not to sure about that, Scott! The coup brought Yeltsin to the fore and he dissolved the USSR rather suddenly and, more importantly, without any overt bloodshed. If he hadn't, it would sooner or later had crumbled, yes, but it most likely would have ended in numerous armed rebellion and what have we. Up to the coup there had been some fighting in the Caucasus area and in the Baltics. It would, I should think, be a trend that would be reinforced with the passing of time, so that when the USSR finally collapses it does so very violently with civil war, local rebellions, etnic cleansing etc ect. Ukraine might go up in flames as the country even today is divided between russians and little russians - or, if you please, west and east. And there's lots of other potential flash points in the old USSR, and even modern Russia.Scott Rosenthal said:
It's strange to say this, but thank God for the attempted coup and Boris Yeltsin!
Best regards!
- Mr.Bluenote.
Mr. Bluenote: Yeltsin is a somewhat problematic figure, don't you think? His corruption and incompetence lost most of the 90s for a rebuilding Russia...perhaps a bit of conflict might have been worth freeing Russia from his dead (and inebriated) hand...
I am also not sure that I agree that absent the failed coup, there would have been a greater tendency towards violence. There has been plenty anyway, and the hardliners didn't get support from the army or the security agencies in any case. In point of fact, Putin, who was a mover in the KGB at this time, got his start in big-time politics in Russia because of his support for Yeltsin during the coup. I just don't see who (other than the hardliners, who were discredited a bit earlier, and who didn't enjoy much support anyway) would have fared much differently
Wait! I do know someone else....Gorbachev, who was exposed as a fraud and a creature of the Western media much earlier than would have been the case without Yeltsin's stand at the Kremlin...
I am also not sure that I agree that absent the failed coup, there would have been a greater tendency towards violence. There has been plenty anyway, and the hardliners didn't get support from the army or the security agencies in any case. In point of fact, Putin, who was a mover in the KGB at this time, got his start in big-time politics in Russia because of his support for Yeltsin during the coup. I just don't see who (other than the hardliners, who were discredited a bit earlier, and who didn't enjoy much support anyway) would have fared much differently
Wait! I do know someone else....Gorbachev, who was exposed as a fraud and a creature of the Western media much earlier than would have been the case without Yeltsin's stand at the Kremlin...
Yeltsin became a nutjob, no argument there! At the time he was quite capable and on to something right, you know, freedom and democracy! 
But my point is that he saved the USSR, and its citizens, a lot of grief by dispanding it so suddenly and abruptly. Without this rapid dissovement, it would have been a long and violent break-up of the Union! Gorbachev and his allies would have tried to keep the USSR together, and it might even be with the help of the Armed Forces (which was why I mentioned the Caucasus and the Baltics). A failing central government and Communist system would have encouraged various Nationalists around the Union to try for independence sooner or later...
Why do you think a dying USSR would have gone down quitely, Scott?
Regards etc!
- Bluenote.
But my point is that he saved the USSR, and its citizens, a lot of grief by dispanding it so suddenly and abruptly. Without this rapid dissovement, it would have been a long and violent break-up of the Union! Gorbachev and his allies would have tried to keep the USSR together, and it might even be with the help of the Armed Forces (which was why I mentioned the Caucasus and the Baltics). A failing central government and Communist system would have encouraged various Nationalists around the Union to try for independence sooner or later...
Why do you think a dying USSR would have gone down quitely, Scott?
Regards etc!
- Bluenote.
Blue: The USSR did die quietly, which is why I would assume that it did... With the exception of Gorbachev (not too bright), and the hardliners (no real alternatives for them), nobody saw the USSR surviving, and most of the players simply tried to get the best deal for themselves. Wrecking the whole thing with a Samson-like finish wasn't going to benefit anyone, and the security services (military/KGB) certainly weren't interested in that...
You have a more generous view of Yeltsin than I do, but reasonable people can certainly disagree. I would merely point out that Yeltsin consistently said the right words and did the wrong things, and his definition of democracy seemed to be limited to getting a public stamp of approval for his own policies, though he never let this stop him from implementing them. The Chechen fiascos are a good example of this process in action...
You have a more generous view of Yeltsin than I do, but reasonable people can certainly disagree. I would merely point out that Yeltsin consistently said the right words and did the wrong things, and his definition of democracy seemed to be limited to getting a public stamp of approval for his own policies, though he never let this stop him from implementing them. The Chechen fiascos are a good example of this process in action...