Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (56328)	9/28/1999 12:40:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

The posture of the Warsaw Pact was always offensive. The Soviets promulgated the doctrine of "offensive defense" to rationalize it, a doctrine which basically stated that the best defense is a good offense<VBG>...And when I say that they were in an offensive posture, I mean that they not only had more men and materiel, but that they were in "forward deployment", ordinarily....Clearly there was a rivalry. Now, liberal Kremlinologists predicted that the bellicosity of the Reagan Administration would favor Soviet hard- liners, and merely worsen our situation vis a vis the Soviets. In fact, the opposite happened, and reformers came into power, and made a special effort to get on with Reagan and Thatcher. So, I would say that it is logical to see that as a response to our build- up and aid to the mujaheddin and contras, and to see it as an attempt to undercut the rationale for such support. As I said, the hard- liners were not decisively defeated, but still wielded power in the Politburo, and yet Gorbachev had, for quite awhile, a free hand.Why? I would say that "lulling" is at least a plausible explanation.....