Author Topic: You Senator, are no Ronald Reagan  (Read 1978 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: You Senator, are no Ronald Reagan
« Reply #15 on: May 28, 2008, 07:03:55 PM »
I think the U.S.S.R. was destroyed by the West, first by military attacks during the Revolution and Civil War, then by subversion, then by the attack of Adolf Hitler, then by the Cold War, when the West encircled the U.S.S.R. with military bases, threatened it with nuclear anihilation and forced it to spend for self-defence the funds that should have gone into reconstruction of the appalling devastation of WWII.

I believe the Soviet people could have been mobilized to continue the struggle against fascism's successors, but the Soviet leadership took some wrong turns, opting for the easy way out once the immediate danger of Nazi Germany was demolished.

Reagan's role in all of this was minimal.  He continued policies that had been developed by others - - bleed the Russians.  Star Wars was a part of it, Afghanistan was a part of it.  Sure, the Afghan War was a socialist mistake, but the U.S.S.R. was asked to come to the rescue of a sister socialist government, fighting off an attack from 19th-Century warlords and they fulfilled their socialist duty of solidarity.  Maybe the mistake was not getting out sooner (which would only have encouraged the fascists of Eastern Europe to rise up against the Red Army) or maybe they should have assessed the situation better and seen where the Afghan Communist Party was going wrong and failing to mobilize the population against the warlords.  Maybe if the warlord allegiances were tribal, this should have resulted in a shake-up of CP leadership cadres.  I don't know exactly where they fucked up, but it's pretty clear in the result that fuck up they did.

I tend to agree with XO here - - Reagan was a figurehead, an empty suit.  A decades-old policy (bleed 'em) obviously has to adapt to changing times and new opportunities and at most that's what Reagan allowed to happen.  Others saw the opportunities, crafted the basic policy through its new adaptations (war in Afghanistan, Star Wars) and Reagan was savvy enough to stay out of their way.

I wonder how many Americans see the tragedy in the fall of the U.S.S.R.  It's certainly no secret to the Russian people, whose standard of living, quality of life and even life expectancy have plummeted dramatically since the fall of communism.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: You Senator, are no Ronald Reagan
« Reply #16 on: May 28, 2008, 07:46:08 PM »
If all these things really made no diffrence and Reagan could not have chosen to make a diffrence , why was Gorbachof comeing to Iceland to ask forsome releif?

====================================

Reagan, you will recall, spoke of pushing the red button and the "Evil Empire", and joked about a desire to push the Soviets back rather than containing them. Gorbachov wanted to make his peaceful ambitions to be well known.

Reagan may have wanted to make a difference, and may have made a difference, but I do not think that Carter or Mondale would have made a great difference.

If there is no danger of a war between the US and the USSR, is it not logical that both sides should save the bother of both sides pissing away huge amounts of money on unneeded weapons?


The Soviet Union was dangerous and imperialistic , but it was their fantasy of our being a danger to them that caused them to spend all of their money and resorces to build the worlds second strongest military force on the worlds eighteenth strongest economy.