Who would win USA vs. Russia (with and without nukes)
Considering Russian military doctrine is so heavily dependent on nuclear weapons, once the US dealt with the elite of the Russian forces, it would be a one sided bloodbath. Also few realize the US has a larger military who is heavily experienced in combat. The vast majority of Russian troops even the elite units have not see combat. Experience is often a decisive factor in the early stages of a war. In the air and on the sea, it would be one sided, but on the land, it would be a closer battle, but yet again the Russians would be wore down by their heavy reliance on elite forces and weaker air power.
How did USA win 'space race' when Russian made it to space first?
along with first animal in space, first womans in space, first everything except moon landing, which is a different race. race to moon. plus russia cann still afford space travel, usa cant. you are bankrupt and poverty.
Was Stalin a necessary evil? ?
Stalin is much maligned and while much criticism is warranted the truth is that he saved the world from a much worse fate. Stalin had the foresight to modernize the USSR and build up its armed forces as fast as possible, to withstand nazi attack. Had someone less ruthless been in power, it's doubtful the Russians would have built all those T-34s and other military weapons in time to resist nazi invasion in 1941 and afterwards. Modernization and militarization required great SACRIFICES--guns before butter, conscription etc--and its doubtful a democracy could've imposed such unpopular sacrifices in peacetime i.e. BEFORE the enemy attacked, not after, by which time it would've been too late. Unlike the US, the USSR was not shielded by great oceans, it was wide open to enemy attack and couldn't afford the luxury of waiting until war actually came to mobilize and prepare. Had there been no Stalin, the nazis would've conquered the USSR. People endlessly whine that Stalin killed millions but had it not been for him, the nazis would've killed virtually ALL of the russians and other slavs. The Reich would've taken all soviet territory to the Urals and, bolstered by its vast natural wealth, would've subsequently become a superpower. With Russia destroyed in 1941, the western allies would've been slaughtered in normandy--if they dared attack at all. High casualties would've forced the West to make peace with the reich, possibly as early as late 1942 and the reich would've dominated the postwar world. More than any other man, Stalin prevented that, and furthered victory.
Why are the bad guys in action movies almost always Russian?
I think you may be experiencing what psychologists call an availability bias - the tendency to spot things that are familiar more frequently than they actually occur (effectively because you tend discount examples when they don't).That said, different eras have had a leaning towards different sources of villainy. Immediately post WWII, the Germans were the obvious target.With the Cold War, "the Soviets" certainly used to be an easy target. But since the Reagan-Gorbachev era things have changed a bit.There was a period in the 90s when Hollywood cast around desperately for other sources of villainy. One of the Lethal Weapon films landed on South Africans, but for a while the tendency was to cast British actors (often Alan Rickman) as the bad guys.Eastern Europeans have come back into vogue a bit with a recent focus on foreign organised crime. But I think that the distribution of bad guys is more cosmopolitan than it has been in a long time. Look at recent Bond films (working from memory here). Goldeneye - Rogue Russian separatists (though there were Russians on the good guys' side as well)Tomorrow Never Dies - Western Media Mogul The World Is Not Enough - ultimately, a French heiressDie Another Day - North KoreansCasino Royale - Quantum, an international criminal organisationA Quantum of Solace - Quantum, an international criminal organisationSkyfall - A rogue, vaguely Latin American, agentSpectre - Spectre, an international criminal organisationOr you could consider the Bourne films - where in each case the bad guys were ultimately corrupt elements within the US intelligence system.