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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (5390)9/20/2006 2:28:20 PM
From: American Spirit  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224729
 
Quit posting BS the defense industry wants people to believe, that enormous wasteful defense spending like the MX Missile or SDI makes our enemies give up and go home. That's BS.

While Reagan deserves some credit for pressuring the Soviets, their downfall was well underway during Carter's administration and was mostly propelled by Gorbachev, Lech Walesa, Russian young people, Germany, the Pope, Jews, rock n' roll and ironically people like Bin Laden in Afghanistan who beat Soviets badly there, and were armed by the CIA.

In fact Bin Laden may have been a CIA asset under Reagan. Reagan also armed Saddam and Iran both. And much of his arms spending was deficit spending which took a decade to pay off.



To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (5390)9/22/2006 1:12:03 AM
From: RMF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224729
 
Ann...the Russians didn't have to increase military spending.
They already had 10,000 nuke missiles aimed at US.

Gorbachev is the only reason the U.S.S.R. broke apart. If a "hardliner" had been in there instead of Gorbachev, we'd STILL be in the cold war. Reagan could have spent a TRILLION a year on defense and it wouldn't have made ANY difference.

We spend 500 TIMES as much as N. Korea on the military, but I don't see THEM collapsing. We spend 15 TIMES as much as China on the military, but I don't see THEM collapsing.