Cold War leaders negotiated with the USSR while simultaneously countering Soviet aggression in the military, geopolitical and ideological sphere. They committed huge amounts of money, material and manpower to their militaries, so that the USSR would be deterred from starting a hot war. They were taking the ideological fight to the commies all around the globe. They were even willing to engage in nuclear brinksmanship to show strength to the Soviets.

The Cold War was not won by diplomacy, it was won by a sufficient, well-calibrated commitment to military deterrence and then outlasting the enemy's inferior economic model.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jan 18 2023 10:19pm

THE MAYOR OF DNIPRO SAID THE MISSILE WAS AIMED AT POWERSTATIONS


NOW GO TELL THE GUY HE'S A PUTIN BOOTLICKER

While the Soviets also committed huge amounts of money / manpower / research etc etc.

I'm sure you know the meaning of the words "arms race".

Diplomacy ended the cold war, it's all history, you can look it up

again the question, my "special" friend: who do you think operates / uses / lives in civilian infrastructure? if you target civilian infrastructure, you inevitably kill civilians. this isn't... rocket science (slightly inappropriate pun maybe).

The Cold War ended because the Soviet Union collapsed economically.

You make it sound like they suddenly become more docile and open to diplomacy for no good reason, and then happened to experience a tooootally unrelated economic collapse a couple of years later.
The true timeline is that they first ran out of economic steam, couldn't sustain their economic and military model anymore and therefore became more open to reforms and good-faith negotiations with the West.

That's why I said I condemn the attack, LMK if you need the quote to refresh your memory.




Dunno if you remember but the Soviets were in East Germany and Berlin and had a huge army literally ready to go rock and roll.

There was no shot fired when protests erupted (while previously they shot people for trying to cross), they pulled out after probably the most successful negotiations in human history.

That you try to spin it differently is ridiculous. Is it no longer appropriate to talk about diplomacy or negotiations in todays' Russia-bad climate?

The mayor said the missile was "absolutely inaccurate" even if "likely aimed at powerstations".
Circle jerking on "target" or "aimed" is not really funny because these people were deliberately assassinated by the Russian regime.
Like if you put an apple on your head...



Talking works, after the fight...
Involving "diplomacy", "negotiating", or "talks" without any factual geopolitical argument is simply a disguise for concessions.

Some people can't read and are dumb, etc etc

You remember wrong. In 1989, the soviets no longer had a huge army stationed in East Germany. There was no major diplomatic effort by the West to negotiate that the East German government would let the protests spiral out of control, or that the Soviets wouldn't interfere. These things happened because the socialist systems in the Eastern Bloc were imploding, and this, in turn, happened because the USSR had run out of steam economically.

The big diplomatic initiative, namely the Two Plus Four Agreement about the peaceful reunification of Germany, negotiated between the West and the Soviets, only took place after the Fall of the Berlin Wall.
Going beyond Germany and looking at the bigger picture: the Iron Curtain got lifted because the Soviet Union, the hegemon of the Warsaw Pact, no longer had the power to hold its increasingly fractious empire together. In the end, the Soviets not only lost their satellites, even the Soviet Union itself fell apart.

Dude... Russian forces remained in Eastern Germany up to 1994...