Talk:Cold War

This article contains content imported from the English Wikipedia article on Cold War. View the page revision history for a list of the authors.

What to list (and what not)

(Audible sigh) So in light of recent edits here how would you propose to have this list read? Or can we avoid it altogether? Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:55, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

What would you prefer? What about “During the Cold War, the United States and its allies were called...” ? Or is that not specific/US-centric even? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:16, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

It would be fine to remove the paragraph altogether. It's just a tangential aside in an article about traveling to Cold War historic sites. —Granger (talk · contribs) 20:08, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Not all U.S. allies were considered "first world". The only countries that are typically considered "first world" are the United States, Japan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Israel and European countries west of the Iron Curtain (which will include even technically neutral states like Finland, Austria and Switzerland, which we all know were de facto U.S. allies even though they were nominally neutral). Other U.S. allies like Thailand, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan and South Korea are traditionally considered "third world". And likewise, "second world" generally only applied to the communist countries in Europe, and not to other communist countries like North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba or China. Communist countries outside Europe are traditionally considered "third world" too. I think it's a nice note to have since even though the term "second world" has fallen out of use, "first world" and "third world" are still very commonly used. The dog2 (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken, Israel was considered a developing country ("Third World") until, I don't know, the 90s, maybe the late 80s? Where is "Third World" still commonly used? It was replaced by "developing country" increasingly since, what, the 70s at the latest? And it gradually became regarded as more and more insulting, I thought, but maybe not in Singapore, now that it's been a developed country for a few decades? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:23, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

My impression is that "developing country" is the formal term, but "third world" is still commonly used colloquially. Speaking of which, the second part of Lee Kuan Yew's memoirs were titled "From Third World to First". As for Singapore, I remember that when I was attending primary and secondary school (1990s-early 2000s), Singapore was still considered to be a developing country, albeit one of the richer developing countries. If I recall correctly, when I was in high school and university, Singapore's GDP per capita was roughly on par with that of Spain, and that was when Singapore began to be widely considered a developed country. And if I recall correctly, Israel was already considered to be a developed country in the 1990s. The dog2 (talk) 22:51, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

OK, and the Cold War was over in the 90s. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:00, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I have to agree with Granger. That paragraph seems out of context, and if the terminology is so debatable (and no longer used), why do we need to mention it at all? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 03:11, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

As I said, "first world" and "third world" are still in widespread use colloquially. Only "second world" has fallen out of use. The dog2 (talk) 15:04, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't think "Third World" is in widespread use colloquially in the U.S., at least. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:56, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘OK, maybe it varies between countries, but these terms are still commonly used colloquially in Singapore. Maybe this is similar to how calling female flight attendants "air stewardesses" is still common in Singapore, but considered sexist in the U.S. The dog2 (talk) 19:33, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, could be. I think here we talk about developed countries as opposed to poor or developing countries or use rude terms for them (most of us don't use Trump's "shithole countries" but could talk about undeveloped or backward countries or something - I don't know what general terms people tend to use when they're being insulting but aren't Trumpites). Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:25, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

In Singapore, we use the terms "developed country" and "first-world country" interchangeably, and likewise with "developing country" and "third-world country". I personally don't get the sense that the latter terms are derogatory, but again, it could be different in the U.S. The dog2 (talk) 21:24, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

This discussion was only about the "Russia" subheading, which is why I thought it read better to "keep the focus on the Soviets". Obviously, in a "World War II in Europe" article, I would expect a reference or two to German activities in the broader article. As far as whether or not POW treatment is warranted, I'm not sure. The information is interesting and is somewhat unique. Just whittling it down to the statement "POWs were mistreated on both sides" (as you suggested) to me does not seem clear that we are talking about the SOVIETS treating both badly, which is the point. It's not very interesting that Germans would treat Soviet captives badly and that Soviets would treat German captives badly, but the point there is that the Soviets treated the German captives badly AND fellow Soviets returning after being captured by the Germans badly to the point of killing some/many. Perhaps it would seem to fit more if one of the listed sites was a place where returning Soviet POWs were tried and/or killed.eturning after being captured by the Germans badly to the point of killing some/many. Perhaps it would seem to fit more if one of the listed sites was a place where returning Soviet POWs were tried and/or killed.

Merge Cold War and Cold War Europe

Swept in from the pub

Given that both articles are quite short, I was wondering if we should merge Cold War Europe in the Cold War article. After all, the Cold War was in many ways a global conflict, and you could in a sense see the Korean War and Vietnam War as an offshoot of the Cold War. This merger would also adequately allow us to cover things like the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Sino-Soviet Split and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which were very much a part of the Cold War. The dog2 (talk) 18:09, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Cold War Europe is a usable article, and I see no problems with its size. If the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the conflicts in Africa, Latin America, Middle East and the war in Afghanistan are included and covered adequately, its size will become unwieldy. Why cannot these other conflicts be covered in Cold War, making it grow to more than a stub? –LPfi (talk) 18:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Only the first two paragraphs in Cold War Europe are relevant for the other continents. The Understand section would have to be much developed, probably making the article structure convoluted. Groups trained and armed by CIA and Cuba fighting in Africa, Iraq getting weapons in turns from the USA and the Soviet Union, these are things that did not happen in Europe, although we were aware of them, some more than others. –LPfi (talk) 19:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

This is what is wrong with allowing amateur historians free rein

• "In many ways, the Cold War is a very present thing."
• "In the 21st century, a new cold war has emerged between the United States and China, with both blocs now vying for influence among the world's poorer countries."

These are personal opinions. Not history. And not related to travel.The Cold War lasted from 1947 to 1991 according to most historians. Those who want a place to write down their own thoughts on global politics should start a blog, not a Wikivoyage article.

• "While there are still communist countries as of 2019, most of them are only communist in name but capitalist in practice, and generally, it is considered that capitalism won the war."

Thanks for that blinding insight.

• "The use of the terms "first world" and "third world" to refer to developed and developing countries respectively had its origins in the Cold War. During the Cold War, the United States, its Western allies, Israel and Japan were called the "first world", the Soviet Union and its communist satellite states in Central and Eastern Europe were called the "second world", and all other countries, which were mostly poor and underdeveloped, were called the "third world"."

These terms defined different types of economies. They are only related to the geopolitical issue by being from the same era. And this paragraph does not inform the reader about anything related to travel, or the Cold War. It is just more terminology.

I removed the links to World War II articles because this article is about the Cold War. There remain references to World War II in the intro and the Context section. Ground Zero (talk) 13:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)