Talk:Foreign relations of the Soviet Union

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 January 2019 and 2 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lilbambam55.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Much to be desired

A lot of the info on this page is verifiably untrue. I don't know much about wikipedia flagging but I'd consider calling this a stub or whatever

Untitled

Please do some genuine research before accusing copyvio; this is a public domain country study from the United State's Library of Congress. [1] 119 20:13, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

China

Where's china? This is a huge part of Soviet relations, no?

The Vietnam War, The Korean War, Cuban Missile Crisis, Sino-Soviet Relations

Sorry, it just seems you missed out a fair bit of Soviet Foreign Policy. This is a real summary or starting point. I'm sure they're mentioned in other sections to a fuller extent but maybe you could mention that these were part of SFP so they can be explored?

Vietnam War --> aided Ho Chi minh and sent supplies to Vietnam until even after the war that helped the Vietnamese economy to survive

Korean War

--> walked out of secutiry council of UN, of which they were co-founders

--> sent troops to Korea as well

Cuban Missile Crisis

--> Castro didn't really even play an important role in the crisis, Khrushchev helped bring the Cold War to the brink of hot war

Sino-Soviet Realtions Shattered unity of Communist Bloc

Cause:

• 1956: Khrushchev denounced Stalinism without Mao

• 1958: Mao bombs islands without Khrushchev

• 1960: China attacks ‘peaceful co-existence’ saying it undermines world revolution

Results:

• Soviet experts withdraw from China

• USSR doesn’t help during 1961 famine

• In a border dispute between China and India, USSR backs India

• Almost a war between China and USSR, to the extent that troops lined up at the borders, as the Chinese claimed land the Tsars had taken.

• Can see that USSR was not dominating the world through this example

• 1962: Mao criticises Khrushchev for Cuban Missile crisis

• Moscow began to pursue a policy of containment of China, isolating it by improving relations with Laos, Cambodia, Japan, etc.

This article is so positive. "The Soviets no longer sought collective but individual security, and the Pact with Hitler was signed, giving Soviets protection from the most aggressive European power and increasing Soviet sphere of influence." So increasing your sphere of influence and later occupying other states is not agression? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.135.136.67 (talk) 16:32, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

More information available

This article has good information on the relations in the middle east, seriously very detailed and very informative. However, this article doesn't mention anything about Soviet-African relations (Angola, Libya would be strong topics) or Soviet-South American relations (Cuba, el Salvador, Venezuela). I'm not very good at doing research and editing so I just want to propose that someone with the skills and the time try to find some good encyclopaedic articles and maybe start a topic on some of these. Udachi, ¬¬¬¬  — Preceding unsigned comment added by JJ5788 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 31 August 2016 (UTC) 

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Foreign relations of the Soviet Union. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304025623/http://eufunding.org.uk/terror/FundingEvil.pdf to http://eufunding.org.uk/terror/FundingEvil.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:33, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Soviet apologetics in full force

Since I'm getting attacked by apparent Soviet apologists who want to conceal Soviet crimes and expunge them from the lead despite the fact that they are very, very well sourced, I just want to ask one question: why?

First rvt

Second rvt

First editor seemed to demand sources, disregarding the fact that all listed events were linked to their respective articles which in turn contain all the necessary sources. But I made a decision to comply and added tons of sources that support my argument. Then the second editor came and again simply reverted because he didn't like the truth about Soviet crimes. If Wikipedia wants to become a platform for all sorts of Soviet/totalitarian communist apologetics, then go ahead, tell that openly, don't hide under the mask of reliability and fairness. 185.213.212.250 (talk) 22:48, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Just wanted to add that I decided to create an account because unregistered IP editors are routinely abused on this platform and, generally, their contributions and opinions are utterly disrespected. To be clear, 185.213.212.250 (talk) is my IP. Vesorax1939 (talk) 22:53, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

• Reply: If a change is objected to, the onus is on the editor who wishes to make a change to show how their changes improve the article and gain a consensus from other editors before making the change. Two editors have objected to your edits based on WP:NPOV not supported by sources.   // Timothy :: talk  22:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

The secret protocol is not supported by sources? Soviet invasion of Finland and Poland, occupation of the Baltics is not supported by sources? Maybe you read the articles about those events first? Vesorax1939 (talk) 23:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Two editors objected because they of their pro-Soviet, pro-totalitarian bias. And to be honest with you, the second editor Bcoto is really suspicious and might turn out to be someone's sock puppet. Vesorax1939 (talk) 23:01, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Article lead section rewrite

I think the lead section of this article is far too long and should be rewritten to be more concise and better conform to MOS:LEAD. I suggest the following for discussion:

• The first paragraph should summarize the main phases of Soviet foreign policy as outlined in the article: 1917-1939, World War II, and Cold War. Eliminate detail that is covered in the article.
• Next three paragraphs can summarize the main points in each of the three phases above.
• The information is correct, but it needs to be more concise with less unneeded detail. Remove statements such as "However, the Soviet Union proved strong enough to defeat Nazi Germany, with help from its key allies.", and information best covered in the article body such as "By signing a treaty with Germany in 1939 the Soviet Union hoped to create a buffer zone between them and Germany."

If there is a consensus that the lead could be rewritten in a more concise way that conforms to MOS:LEAD, I'll put some time into it and propose the changes for review.

If there is a consensus to leave it alone or another proposal, please comment.   // Timothy :: talk  00:43, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Read 2 Timothy 2:22 and interpreted it in to today's contemporary context

interprete it to today's obituaries context

103.14.91.86 (talk) 04:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)