Was 1972 peak USSR?

>America losing in Vietnam, thanks in (significant) part to the USSR
>early warning systems developed
>Eastern Bloc subdued fully (Brezhnev doctrine)
>semi-conductor Revolution that put the US far ahead of the USSR did not bear fruit yet
>the Soviets finally have functional ICBMs, and more nukes than Americans

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    I think the Arab oil embargo made them even stronger briefly, relatively
    But then there's weird shit like this going on simultaneously
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_United_States%E2%80%93Soviet_Union_wheat_deal

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Nothing weird. Soviet agriculture was failing significantly due to kolkhozes being an ineffective crap.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        I mean it seems weird that happens at the peak of the USSR anyway.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Well, that's why it's a peak and not a plateau.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        The USSR with its big ass population and climate creates problems so no suprise. Kolkhozes were not the biggest contributors to agriculture but rather independent farmers. Imo the USSR should have grazed more considering meat is more nutritous than grain

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          US had about the same population and smaller territory, although arguably more fertile land. As for independent farmers check out how many of them were compared to kolkhozes. Who would have thought that individual farmsteads operating on market principles turned out to be more effective than state-organised centrally planned collectives?
          >the USSR should have grazed more considering meat is more nutritous than grain
          They did, the amount of livestock in the Soviet Union was huge, and nevertheless good quality meat was in deficit. I really wonder why...

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >meat is more nutritous than grain
          In work per calorie, yield per area of land and time to harvest cattle has always been massively inferior to agriculture and therefore significantly more expensive, which is why all the world's staple foods are wheat, rice, potatoes and corn which are the most productive, low maintenance and adaptable crops out there.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Not all ground is suitable for high-intensity grain farming and not all grains are made equal.
            If you want a healthy population and to maximize land use, you will have pasture areas, and you will grow a mix of cultures.

            If you want a malnourished and feeble populace, you will only rely on rice and maize.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              Of course you want balanced diet, if you only eat carbs of any kind with little plant fiber your digestive system will feel like shit. You'd also want to rotate the crop fields so they don't become drained of the plant nutrients. I was just oversimplifying things from a pure "basic nutrition per unit of work and land" point of view.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            >muh farming
            You stupid b***h they fricking tried that.
            >grazing
            That means GRASS. I know you're a dumb fricking pinko but people can't fricking eat grass.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              Bruh, did you think they didn't try animal husbandry? Fresh meat was always a deficit good in soviet times and usually outside a worker's earnings.

              Also, pastures take up space that could have been used for agriculture and are often cultivated artificially anyway.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >op
                >they should have raised more meat animals because crop failure
                >you
                >well ackshully pastures take up more land than farming so they should have farmed more!
                >widespread crop failure
                Yeah because if they grew just 1 more field the widespread famines caused by shitty practices and climate not suited for farming wouldn't have happened.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                You're moronic. All i sais is animals would never help them with the famine, yet you're making up some moronation about how i'm making excuses for the failures of soviet agriclture. Was it you who made the fricking moronic post or something?

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >you
                >the USSR chronically lacked animal protein through its existence....
                >some other homosexual
                >they should have raised more livestock-
                >you
                >reeeeeeeee
                Shut up.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >>you
                >>the USSR chronically lacked animal protein through its existence....
                You're a lying homosexual, you know that? USSR lacked nutrition, period. Livestock are an inefficient way to provide nutrition on a large scale.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        The USSR with its big ass population and climate creates problems so no suprise. Kolkhozes were not the biggest contributors to agriculture but rather independent farmers. Imo the USSR should have grazed more considering meat is more nutritous than grain

        It was not just holodomor and kolkhoses, it was also a horrible ecology as they ruined their lands far and wide for minute industrial gains as well as probably the biggest, most massive hit to their agriculture - Lysenkoism. This fricking guy promoted basically communist agriculture which denied genetics and inheritability and operated in terms of environment shaping the plant. He also got a ton of geneticists murdered as traitors during stalin's times. Only with Brezhnev did he get ousted and the consequences lasted a lot longer still.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Didn't the oil end up fricking them up in the end? Pretty sure most of the Khruschevs developmentalist policies that would have made USSR into a modern country went bankrupt due to shifts in oil prices

  2. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    USSR was all downhill since WW2.
    Almost all of their technology is stolen.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      How can you say that seriously. The USSR was a formidable force to be reckoned with until the day of its collapse. And before you begin with
      >muh Afghan war
      Let’s think about OUR afghan war. A war with the Soviet Union would’ve been a war of complete destruction for both nations.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >The USSR was a formidable force to be reckoned with until the day of its collapse.
        The day of it collapse showed it to be a paper tiger.
        They only managed to oppose Eastern Europe for a measly 45 years.
        There are anons on here that have lived in their parents basements longer than that.

  3. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    No. It was 1964. The Year USSR broke and started rolling downhill.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      70s USSR was peak, it was also a very peaceful era for both sides but it would not last forever considering it stagnated the nations economy and development once the 80s rolled around. I do believe if that israeli cowboy Ronald Reagan wasn't elected USSR and US cooperation could have been achieved

      >1990s higher life expectancy than 1970s
      I doubt that graph so much

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >I doubt that graph so much
        The rise in 1986 is attributed to the Gorbachev's anti-alcohol campaign. It also raised the birthrate.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Damn, was Gorbachev an actual decent Russian ruler?

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            yes

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Soviet Union would have had total collapse of economy by late 70's if not for Yom Kippur War and Iraq-Iran War causing price of oil to skyrocket. Oil crises are only reason their economy lasted until late 80's. Their economy was stagnant from early 60's, immediately from the point when natural growth caused by WWII rebuilding came to close. One might argue that their economy was stagnant from the start, Stalin dodged the issue by using slave labor on massive scale. Nikita Khrushchev had WWII rebuilding going on.

        Didn't the oil end up fricking them up in the end? Pretty sure most of the Khruschevs developmentalist policies that would have made USSR into a modern country went bankrupt due to shifts in oil prices

        They barely had economy outside of resource extraction. Everything industrial was people pretending to work for people pretending to pay those "workers".

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >US USSR cooperation
        Frick no the USSR can rest in piss.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah reagan just pissed on their dying corpse as we cheered. Only commie larpers care

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Also worth nothing - the USSR has not had accurate, non-manipulated demographic data after the 60s.

  4. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Was 1972 peak USSR?
    In terms of how relevant they were? They peaked already then. Think ten years earlier, Cuban Missile Crisis. People were shitting their pants for full-scale nuclear war.

  5. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Abel Archer '83
    On the cusp of attempting Doomsday but chickened out because Brezhev's terminal cancer and the Party & Security elements fearing a coup once they got sealed in the fallout bunkers by the Military.

  6. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes

  7. 11 months ago
    Anonymous
  8. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >America losing in Vietnam
    lol wrong timeline friend.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      I'd put it pre-1971 due to Nixon's diplomatic breakthrough with the PRC. Probably sometime around 1954 owing to it really being the last time the Sino-Soviet split really looked recoverable.

      I know inside the USSR the 1970s were considered the peak and the era of stagnation owing to economic and military factors but with China the USSR lost it's only significant ally. Then you factor in that France and Britain were still fighting imperial rebellions in Africa up until the 1960s and Western Europe while growing fast had still yet to really dominate the Eastern bloc.

      Khrushchev fricked everything.

      The US ran away, loser.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Lol, 1050s USSR was a backward decrepit shithole ruined by war. Shut the frick up you moronic tankie.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Witty retort, Cletus.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >1050s USSR
          When the hell did Red Alert 4 come out?

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            obviously a typo, 1950s

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              You can't fool me, anon. Show me where you hid the Chronosphere.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            >red alert 4
            I wrote a fanfic years ago about how to make Red Alert 4.
            >a Allied general responsible for guarding the time travel technology lost all 3 of his sons during the last war
            >grief stricken he hatches a plan to prevent EVERY war from happening in the first place
            >he goes back in time and kills.....
            >Karl Marx
            >he comes back into the present time and finds that the world is prosperous and high tech
            >he goes home in a hovercar
            >only to fly above slums where most people live in wretched poverty
            >the Corporate Alliance rules the world, with nations subordinate to the sheer power of the corporations
            >however a challenger to their power has risen
            >the Workers Union, or The Union is a resistance group that has gone worldwide
            The aesthetic would be cyberpunk/robocop grunge with humor and satire about Globohomosexual and neo-liberal policies.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >The US ran away
        Then why did the Vietnamese sign the peace treaty and agree to work demand?

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >signed peace treaty
          >US packed up and left
          >unified the country 3 years later
          Almost like they signed it because it was in their favor

  9. 11 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Why do they look so German?

  10. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >early warning systems developed
    They didn't cover mediterranean or the siberian silo fields back then.
    >and more nukes than Americans
    Not yet. They'd reached the same amount of nukes around 1975 and strategic warheads(in ICBMs) in 1976.

    Soviets also only started their military buildup back then and didn't reach the numbers they fielded in 1975 as NATO was sitting on their asses yet.

  11. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    test

  12. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    If there was any chance the USSR had it was immediate post vietnam.

  13. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    No, this is around the time that Soviet agri-business had turned most of Uzbekistan's arable land into cotton farms and started one of the worst runaway environmental disasters in human history that still persists today.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >socialism would be better for the environment!
      That's why I laugh at these "green new deal" morons.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        The Soviets really fricked over the -stan countries in Central Asia hard. They'll be fighting water wars in the coming decades due to terrible agriculture practices that still are actively in use.

  14. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >1972
    Spassky lost to Fischer, though.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *