SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tejek who wrote (130076)12/24/2000 12:35:40 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1571281
 
1 - You didn't answer my question. The obvious reason for this is that there is no deployed active anti balistic missile system in the US.

2 - One nation fell under the onslaught of huge defense budgets and we may be the second if this reactionary call for armaments is met.

The Soviet Union probably spent over 20% of its GNP on defence (at a minimum it was in the teens). The US not many years ago spent 7% now we spend around 4% maybe less (I wasn't able to find up to date figures on this). Even with a strategic missle defense plan, and some more funds for readiness, this percentage will not increase over the next several years. It might increase a tenth or two in any particular year, but over the next 5 or 10 all it would have to do is keep pace with economic growth. Actually it probably would not do even that, it would grow in inflation adjusted dollars but shrink as a % of the budget or as a % of GNP. So ten years out you are talking about 3% of the GNP for defense and this is supposed to be such a burden that it causes our country to fall? Its a lower percentage that at any time since before WWII.

"Reagan launched a military buildup premised on the belief that the Soviet Union was too economically vulnerable to compete in an accelerated arms race and would come to the bargaining table if pressured by the West. He preached a message of freedom that he believed would energize the people of Eastern Europe and penetrate within the Soviet Union itself. Many members of the political establishment, including some leading Republicans, thought these views were at best naive. They were also alarmed by Reagan's provocative comments about communism, particularly his resonant description of the Soviet Union as an "evil empire." But times changed. The Berlin Wall fell in November 1989; by the end of 1991 most nations behind the former Iron Curtain were masters of their destiny, and the Soviet Union, as Reagan had foreseen, was left on the scrapheap of history."

Yes all of this is true. Of course most of the credit has to go to the people in the countries who resisted the oppresive regime. A lot also has to go to Gorbachov. Not for doing what he wanted to do, but for making mistakes. He thought he could reform the sytem but instead he unleashed forces beyond his control. He might have been able to control them with massive forceful repression. Fortunatly he (unlike the communist leaders in China) did not decide to go down that road.

Tim