This is a reply to another message; the squid won't let me respond to that message. Ours not to reason why.
I think less of Presidents I liked or disliked than of actions or policies that I agreed or disagreed with. I respect Truman for standing up to demented Doug MacArthur, Eisenhower for the national highway system, which I think made a much greater contribution to American prosperity than generally reckoned (trust a soldier to
know the importance of roads). Even Nixon, not the most likeable fellow, has to get credit for opening relations with China, all the more so because it went against his fundamental ideological principles. I was never a great Carter fan, but I though he took
more heat than he deserved over the Iran mess, the seeds of which were sown long before he took office. And so on....
Political parties in general, and their representatives, are not something of which I frequently approve.
I have always wondered why the Soviets took up the military spending challenge, which was so patently unnecessary to them. They would have been much wiser to concentrate on a purely deterrent nuclear force
and their proxy wars in the third world, where they got excellent value for money by backing rising forces against falling ones. The notion of preparing for a great tank/air battle in Western Europe always seemed ridiculous to me, a great example of the classic military tendency to prepare for the last war, rather than the next one.
For better or worse, though, they went for it.
I don't question the need for military forces, but a blank check invites abuse, and there is abuse aplenty. We spend a lot for what we get. |
