Why did the Soviet Union collapse? Was the system doomed, or did it fail because of key events and people?
603977
The system was doomed. Even without the cold war, it would eventually have failed. True communism means "Anthill Society", kind of a wrong species model of government. Humans are not communal bugs.
384768
Many scholars believe that the nuclear build up bankrupted Russia.  Russia needed to make sure that it had as many weapons as the U.S. however, nuclear bombs are expensive.  Especially for a Communist country.  I can't think of one communist country who has a better economy than the USA.
495375
For 33 years he was the leader of the Sovier Union.  Stalin's rule was characterized by a cult of personality, a concentration of power, and little concern for the lives of individual people. Stalin battled his opposition through use of a security apparatus that resulted in numerous deaths of Soviet citizens. Many died in the Gulags and in deportations. Nikita Khrushchev, Stalin's eventual successor, denounced this and the cult of personality in 1956, initiating the process of "de-Stalinization" which later became part of the Sino-Soviet Split.
588430
How would this help regain it's past glory?  Even when it was the Soviet Union it had a lot of internal problems which still plague it today.  That's what caused the Soviet Union to collapse in the first place.  I doubt Iran going to war would help them in anyway because it'd disrupt oil production from the country for a period of time (if a ground war broke out).
587231
Actually, Germany collapsed economically and Austria collapsed because of racial and ethnic disillusionment.\n\nIn 1916, the German High Command initiated War Socialism so that the government would set prices for everything regardless of the situation. From that point on, German industry and agriculture produced as little as humanly possible and, even though Germany occupied Poland Rumania and the Ukraine over half a million Germans starved to death. The Austro-Hungarian empire had been tottering since 1848 when it recognized Hungarian autonomy, but as the war continued to go badly the various nationalities began to support the war less and less. In 1917 Emperor Max attempted to negotiate a separate peace, and the German army basically occupied the capital city, Vienna. By November of 1918, many of the ethnic army units marched home and many of the ethnic provinces declared their indepence.
764627
The Domino Theory. The Soviets would export communism to countries one by one making them fall in their sphere. Eventually the US would be surrounded by a globe of hostile nations.
533549
As a product of the Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic , I hope not. You shouldn't say that just based on a fascinating history or the political theories because I agree that they sound good. The Bolsheviks tried to start it, but all that the Bolsheviks managed to start was a line of totalitarian rulers; it was not true Communism. I am certain you would not be so supportive of Communism if you visited nearly any part of the former CCCP/USSR even today. The grim social ills and decay that the Bolsheviks started in the name of Communism are still obvious. It will take many years to fix that. I am proud of my country and it's history, but I hope it keeps history where it belongs and serves as an example to countries contemplating similar leadership styles. Continual brutality and discrimination cannot last, and when it falls, the country falls into an even sadder state because the citizens do not know what to do without being told.\n\nIn conclusion, people have tried to establish Communist entities in the past, but the reality is that while Communist and Socialist theory sound great, they morph into authoritarian or totalitarian leadership.  That is the exact opposite of Communism.  Communism is an impossibility anywhere; it cannot last.  People need leaders, and Communism cannot provide that or the proper government infrastructure.
1081972
Boris Yeltsin was a good transition.  He was someone that the communists didn't hate, and yet he was not a communist, and forged the way for Russia to survive after the fall of the Soviet Union.  So, he was somewhat of a revolutionist.  However, once he was in power, he was not a very good leader.  It took everyone some time to see that he was not the best man for the job, because of the great changes that were taking place as a result of capitolism.  He had a bad drinking problem, which led to his general dislike, distrust, and inability to lead.
128473
It makes a nice story, but it is a myth. \n\nA close look will clearly show the fall of the Soviet Union resulted almost entirely from internal political struggles. The correlation with Reagan’s "anti-Communist" rhetorical stance was merely coincidental, not causal. If you review the available US intelligence documents you will see that the fall of the Soviet Union was completely unexpected--certainly not in any way the result of a planned campaign or strategy.\n\nUnfortunately these self-serving myths are usually more popular than reality, even though the correct information is easily available to anyone who bothers to look. Unfortunatly their understanding of economics appears to fall into the same pattern.
80589
Millions killed in Siberia and purges during Stalin's reign. Millions killed by Mao in China.  Hundreds of thousands killed by Pol Pot.\n\nA system that will NEVER work because it denies human nature's need for incentives.  \n\nKarl ignored all of history when he believed that man is perfectable.  He ignored once a person has power they will NEVER give it up, thus government doesn't fade away.  Karl said that for revolution bloodshed was a necessity.  Any system that demands blood to work can't be a good system.\n\nIf government did fade away into nothing you create a vaccume. Natue abhores a vaccume as can be seen in what happened after WWI when Germany was took the brunt of the blame for the war.  Inflation was so bad it took a wheelbarrow of Deuchemarchs to buy a loaf of bread.  This left an opening for the National Socialists to take over, leaving in their wake six million Jews dead.\n\nAny form of socialism never has worked and never will without an influx of capital.  Even Marx wouldn't have survived if it wasn't for Inglas dad funding him.
608827
Absolutely not. Communism is a political ideology that seeks to establish a future classless, stateless social organization based upon common ownership of the means of production.  In theory, wouldn't it be great to live in a society where education, medical treatment and living costs were all free?  Greed is what causes communism to fail when it is put into practice, but then greed is also what causes democracy to fail in its own aspects.\n\nHowever, many of the major Communists like Marx, Stalin, Mao, and Lenin were all very intelligent people.
1073402
I think disintegration of the USSR as a communist dictatorship can be considered as an achievement itself.\n\nI think Gorbachev did a great service to his country by bringing it back from Orwellian "1984" world back to reality. One can argue what better economic policy could be applied to start moving from centralized economy to the market economy, but Gorbachev role in political reforms and restoring "human values" (общечеловеческих ценностей) is hard to overestimate.\n\nMy personal opinion is that Gorbachev did not really know that it was the beginning of the end when he started his actions in 1985, he honestly believed in a "socialism with human face". And many people (including myself) would simply laugh, if somebody told them in early 1985 that in slightly more than 6 years their country would cease to exist and the communist party will be outlawed (although briefly).
257731
Yeltsin's derailment of Gorbachev's plan to form a loose soviet federation.  Look up the quotes from Gorbachev, last week.  It will give you plenty to write about (e..g., What if Gorby was successful?).
281855
The USSR was bent on world domination, and we had to maintain a balance of power or face nuclear war.The arms race and space programs and Vietnam,Korea were results. Domestically, anti war and civil rights issues nearly split the country.
675428
To answer your questions in order:\n\nYes, the Soviet Union (which included Russia) was an ally of the US and the British.  The USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, also called the Soviet Union.  Russia was a part of the USSR, but wasn't called Russia then), led by Stalin, signed a non-aggression pact with Hitler (leader of Germany).  This was in force until Hitler broke it and invaded the Soviet Union.  Stalin was taken unawares and unprepared, so Hitler did well at first.  Stalin therefore allied with the British and the US to fight the Germans.  The "cold war" didn't start until after WWII During the jostling for control over the states freed from the Nazis. \n\n*****\n\nThe USSR and the Japanese didn't work together.  The war in Europe against Germany) ended sooner than that in Japan (May 8, 1945 for Germany’s surrender and August 15, 1945 for Japan’s) and the USSR was free to declare war on Japan, which it did.  This was one of the reasons that the US dropped nuclear bombs on Japan.  It wanted to end the war before the Soviet Union forces entered the fighting, who would then stay and have control in that country and region.  \n\nAfter WWII Germany was divided into two halves, appropriately called West and East Germany.  The US, the United Kingdom (the British) and France controlled the West.  The Soviet Union controlled the East.  Germany was two different countries.  The US, UK and France set up a democracy in the West and then left (although the US left troops to guard against an attack from the Soviet Union, and many are still stationed there.  Now the bases are used as staging grounds for operations in the Afghanistan and Iraq).  The country they created was called the Federal Republic of Germany.\n\nThe Soviet Union established a country in the Eastern half, called the German Democratic Republic. This was not democratic though – it was communist.  The Soviet Union had many troops stationed there as well, and had a lot of influence in the Eastern half.  Vladimir Putin, the current President of the Russian Federation, worked in East Germany as a spy when he was part of the KGB (this isn’t a secret – he admits it freely and uses his excellent German in speeches).\n\n*****\nGermany played a very strong role in the War.  They were allied with Japan, but because they had some common enemies in their efforts to expand their territories.  In Europe, the war started when Germany annexed Austria and Czechoslovakia, claiming to be uniting the Germans who lived there (Austrians speak German and there were a lot of Germans in Czechoslovakia.  The moved there in the centuries that it belonged to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Austrian Empire and the Holy Roman Empire, which were all names used at different times to describe the same Empire ruled from the Austrian city of Vienna). At this point there was a lot of nervousness in Europe, as Hitler was using rhetoric such as “Germans need more land to live, which is their birthright.” But the British made a deal with Hitler that they would let him keep those countries if he didn’t go any further.  Hitler agreed, but he invaded Poland anyway, and kept going from there. He took France, Bombed England and wanted to invade, and moved through Eastern Europe.  He also invaded the USSR, as mentioned above.\n\nThe US at this point wasn’t involved.  Hitler made an alliance with the Japanese, who were engaged in their own war of expansion, because both were fighting the British and French (the British had a lot of Colonial holdings in the Pacific, and the French had some, too).  \n\nThe US became involved when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.  The Japanese wanted the US to withdraw from the pacific, but instead the US declared war on the Japanese.  The Japanese and the Germans were allied, so Germany declared war on the US, which then also entered the European war.  It was already helping the UK and the USSR with equipment and logistical support,
511293
Even before World War I, citizens of the Russian Empire were beginning to grow uneasy with the direction the Empire was going. This is particularly true for the peasants and the most notably, the intellectuals, who felt they were being oppressed.\nDuring World War I,  the Russian Empire suffered many serious military defeats. These misfortunes along with the downward moving economy help spur riots through the country, especially in major cities. \nIn 1917 the Bolsheviks (under the command of Lenin) led a revolution against Czar Nikolai II and seized power in St. Petersburg and Moscow. Later Czar Nikolai II and most of his family were executed. Afterwards they changed their name to the Communist Party. However they weren’t in power yet. Shortly thereafter a civil war ensued between the Bolsheviks and supporters of the monarchy. The Bolsheviks won and this lead to the forming of the Soviet Union in 1922. \n\n\n(So, I believe that is exactly 150 words.)\n\nOh F-U-C-K YOU  CHINA?????? I just spent 30 minutes writing this! (Partly my fault that I needed so long, I thought it was supposed to be 250 words, so I went into WW II as well. LOL)\n\nI'd better get best answer anyway.
525336
You should probably re evaluate your purpose in asking this question. The Soviet Union crumbled the old fashioned way, one voice at a time. Even the mighty Soviet Army would not turn its guns on its own people. China may not have achieved revolutionary status at Tienanmen Square but their actions spurred systemic economic and political change evident in China's growing economy today. Its never been about rifles its always been ideas that rule the day.