Why Trump Covers for Russian Cyber Attacks

#128
#128
BowlBrother85 said:
Oh, really? So Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (a.k.a. Star Wars) came to fruition... and they just didn't tell us? Reagan burned money like nobody's business. This was when the Republicans lost the high ground on being the "fiscally conservative" party.
Click to expand...

SDI was just one aspect of the miltary buildup. Safe to say the infant technology at the time helps protect us from those pesky Ruskkie missiles today. If anything national defense is the primary purpose of our Fed republic government.

You fail to take into account his ability to get infaltion under control which his predecessor had like 15%. Imagine buying a home or vehcile with such inflation. Regardless

"During Reagan's eight year presidency, the annual deficits averaged 4.0% of GDP, compared to a 2.2% average during the preceding eight years. The real (inflation adjusted) average rate of growth in federal spending fell from 4% under Jimmy Carter to 2.5% under Ronald Reagan."

Comparing a 4% debt to GDP would be equivalent to $800B, not good but money well spent. In fact your buddy Clinton benefitted immensely from the "peace dividend" and Reagan's slaying of the dreaded inflation dragon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#129
#129
Orangeburst said:
SDI was just one aspect of the miltary buildup. Safe to say the infant technology at the time helps protect us from those pesky Ruskkie missiles today. If anything national defense is the primary purpose of our Fed republic government.

You fail to take into account his ability to get infaltion under control which his predecessor had like 15%. Imagine buying a home or vehcile with such inflation. Regardless

"During Reagan's eight year presidency, the annual deficits averaged 4.0% of GDP, compared to a 2.2% average during the preceding eight years. The real (inflation adjusted) average rate of growth in federal spending fell from 4% under Jimmy Carter to 2.5% under Ronald Reagan."

Comparing a 4% debt to GDP would be equivalent to $800B, not good but money well spent. In fact your buddy Clinton benefitted immensely from the "peace dividend" and Reagan's slaying of the dreaded inflation dragon.
Click to expand...
Reagan deserves some credit for getting inflation under control by hanging on to Paul Volcker ( whom Jimmy Carter wisely appointed). Carter was the first to start a deregulation among major industries that was continued by Reagan. Carter was the last president to actually govern as a conservative but conservatives hate him because Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh say he was the “worst president in history” and he had the misfortune of being the recipient of the fiscal damage caused the the Great Society, Vietnam and the Bretton Woods agreement. Btw, Reagan did not cause the USSR to lose the Cold War. The Soviet Union was falling apart before Reagan got into office. The downfall of the ussr was inevitable unless one thinks socialism works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#130
#130
midnight orange said:
Reagan deserves some credit for getting inflation under control by hanging on to Paul Volcker ( whom Jimmy Carter wisely appointed). Carter was the first to start a deregulation among major industries that was continued by Reagan. Carter was the last president to actually govern as a conservative but conservatives hate him because Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh say he was the “worst president in history” and he had the misfortune of being the recipient of the fiscal damage caused the the Great Society, Vietnam and the Bretton Woods agreement. Btw, Reagan did not cause the USSR to lose the Cold War. The Soviet Union was falling apart before Reagan got into office. The downfall of the ussr was inevitable unless one thinks socialism works.
Click to expand...

Well no **** socialsim always fails. Each one has historical perspective, but as a PS student in the 1980's I stand by what I Iearned, so I will stick with my view. Carter was a feckless leader and Reagan precipitated the downfall of communism and a bi polar world.

And just for current perspective. you must not of heard Carter's current views, Aint nothing conservative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#131
#131
Orangeburst said:
Well no **** socialsim always fails. Each one has historical perspective, but as a PS student in the 1980's I stand by what I Iearned, so I will stick with my view. Carter was a feckless leader and Reagan precipitated the downfall of communism and a bi polar world.
Click to expand...

Reagan did not cause the downfall of Soviet communism. This is not opinion. To his credit he established a peaceful rapport with Gorbachev which arguably contributed to a peaceful end to the USSR regime. This was no small achievement.
Orangeburst said:
And just for current perspective. you must not of heard Carter's current views, Aint nothing conservative.
Click to expand...
I don’t care what a politician says his/her views are, I care about what they do. Obama was was going to end wars and close Gitmo.
 
#132
#132
midnight orange said:
Reagan did not cause the downfall of Soviet communism. This is not opinion. To his credit he established a peaceful rapport with Gorbachev which arguably contributed to a peaceful end to the USSR regime. This was no small achievement.

I don’t care what a politician says his/her views are, I care about what they do. Obama was was going to end wars and close Gitmo.
Click to expand...

Reagan accelerated the downfall of the USSR, you are correct that it was destined to fail as all socialist states are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#133
#133
BowlBrother85 said:
LOL. There were signs of the Soviet Union's imminent collapse well before their invasion of Afghanistan. Reagan's excessive defense spending in the 80's wasn't justified by the Cold War. You seem ignorant.
Click to expand...
Who the F are you?.... Mr. Russian Economist or something? Please tell us about the signs of imminent collapse prior to 1980.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Orangeburst
#134
#134
midnight orange said:
Reagan did not cause the downfall of Soviet communism. This is not opinion. To his credit he established a peaceful rapport with Gorbachev which arguably contributed to a peaceful end to the USSR regime. This was no small achievement.

I don’t care what a politician says his/her views are, I care about what they do. Obama was was going to end wars and close Gitmo.
Click to expand...

We are not far apart in our perspective. The premise of the argument was what precipiated the EVENTUAL downfall of the USSR. Reagan's 'peace thru strength" policy worked and any Monday morning QBing can never be proven.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and USAFgolferVol
#135
#135
BowlBrother85 said:
Oh, really? So Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (a.k.a. Star Wars) came to fruition... and they just didn't tell us? Reagan burned money like nobody's business. This was when the Republicans lost the high ground on being the "fiscally conservative" party.
Click to expand...
I guess you’re the type that preferred Carter over Reagan. You were still in your daddy’s sack when Reagan was president and the Soviets were the evil empire..... but let me guess... you read a book penned by a liberal pantywaist that said he was a bad president 🙄
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Orangeburst
#136
#136
Carl Pickens said:
Who the F are you?.... Mr. Russian Economist or something? Please tell us about the signs of imminent collapse prior to 1980.....
Click to expand...

Reagan just reaped the benefits of Carter’s decisions.

Or maybe Obama deserves the credit.
 
#138
#138
hog88 said:
Reagan accelerated the downfall of the USSR, you are correct that it was destined to fail as all socialist states are.
Click to expand...
Maybe marginally but when Gorbachev became premier, he quickly realized they were in dire straits financially. All the state industries had their directors who were corrupt and unsupportive of any changes that would affect their gravy trains. The politburo basically operated like an old mafia family hanging on to turf.
 
#140
#140
midnight orange said:
Maybe marginally but when Gorbachev became premier, he quickly realized they were in dire straits financially. All the state industries had their directors who were corrupt and unsupportive of any changes that would affect their gravy trains. The politburo basically operated like an old mafia family hanging on to turf.
Click to expand...

Significantly not marginally. The USSR would have been around well into the 90s or even early 2000s if they weren’t trying to keep up with us in the arms race. They could have kept the charade going another 10-15 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#141
#141
midnight orange said:
Maybe marginally but when Gorbachev became premier, he quickly realized they were in dire straits financially. All the state industries had their directors who were corrupt and unsupportive of any changes that would affect their gravy trains. The politburo basically operated like an old mafia family hanging on to turf.
Click to expand...

Perestroika and glasnost and the fall of East Germany, the Eastern Bloc and Berlin Wall. Thank you Mr Reagan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#142
#142
Orangeburst said:
We are not far apart in our perspective. The premise of the argument was what precipiated the EVENTUAL downfall of the USSR. Reagan's 'peace thru strength" policy worked and any Monday morning QBing can never be proven.
Click to expand...
More than anything, the death of Stalin is what precipitated the fall of the Soviet Union.
 
#145
#145
hog88 said:
Significantly not marginally. The USSR would have been around well into the 90s or even early 2000s if they weren’t trying to keep up with us in the arms race. They could have kept the charade going another 10-15 years.
Click to expand...

It’s human nature to marginalize historical events and the lessons learned from them. It’s why we are destined to repeat mistakes from the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, hog88 and Carl Pickens
#146
#146
hog88 said:
Significantly not marginally. The USSR would have been around well into the 90s or even early 2000s if they weren’t trying to keep up with us in the arms race. They could have kept the charade going another 10-15 years.
Click to expand...

Chamberlin and Carter. Two peas. Who knows where we would of gone in the prolongment. Gorbachev was a hero and I will never forget this image.

1609204549240.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#147
#147
hog88 said:
Significantly not marginally. The USSR would have been around well into the 90s or even early 2000s if they weren’t trying to keep up with us in the arms race. They could have kept the charade going another 10-15 years.
Click to expand...
They were beyond broke even before Reagan got elected. Gorbachev got into office and tried to establish a bunch of free trade zones (peristroika) based off China’s experiments with Shanghai, Shenzhen, etc. but received no support from the party.
 
#148
#148
midnight orange said:
They were beyond broke even before Reagan got elected. Gorbachev got into office and tried to establish a bunch of free trade zones (peristroika) based off China’s experiments with Shanghai, Shenzhen, etc. but received no support from the party.
Click to expand...

It could of been a nasty ugly disintegration. Just accept the fact it worked and be thankful for both Presidents and their accomplishment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Carl Pickens
#149
#149
Orangeburst said:
It could of been a nasty ugly disintegration. Just accept the fact it worked and be thankful for both Presidents and their accomplishment.
Click to expand...
Hence my earlier statement:
midnight orange said:
To his credit he established a peaceful rapport with Gorbachev which arguably contributed to a peaceful end to the USSR regime. This was no small achievement.
Click to expand...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top