IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New perhaps it worked
>> At the time we had a right-wing President who possessed a single-minded devotion to destroy the "Evil Empire". This narrowness of vision caused the US to align itself with some of the most inhuman entities in the world. Reagan didn't care about anything save the destruction of his "Evil Empire" and the elimination of any Left-Leaning nation. Atrocities committed against "Godless Communists" were no vice at all to Uncle Ronnie or his supporters. <<

One school of thot is that what Reagan did WORKED. He made (or tricked) the Soviets into realizing that their cause was lost and they started doubting themselves.

Of course, the complexities of the downfall of the Soviet Union can have a jillion interpretations, and I suggest one make it a different thread in a different topic if they want to discuss it more.

At least the Soviets would probably not destroy the entire planet to acheive their goal. In that sense, they were more civalized than this new breed of Forced Idealism followers.
________________
oop.ismad.com
New It Worked
But there were side effects to making the deals that we made that are now coming back to haunt us.

I would much rather have this situation we have now (as scary as it might seem), than a strong Russia having destroyed Afghanistan, flexing it's military muscle into Pakistan, Western Europe, Turkey, and Alaska.

Everything we do has intended AND unintended consequences (that we cannot foresee). Sometimes those unintended consequences are a nit, sometimes they are profound.

Remember the Tacoma Narrows Bridge.

Glen Austin
New Time's Man of the Century.
I voted for Reagan as Time Magazine's Man of the Century. From where I sit, he virtually single-handedly destroyed two super-powers by spending them out of existence.
New Remember our discussions - but I forget: Who finally got it?
Hitler?

For better or worse (definitely worse!), he probably influenced the 20th century more than any other single man, AFAICS...

And that says something not only about him, but perhaps above all, about the last century: To have its greatest personal influence be such a bad one, it must have been a pretty bad century, on the whole.
   Christian R. Conrad
The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
     Most Terrible Enemy. - (mmoffitt) - (23)
         Polarization - (gdaustin)
         The enemy of our enemy is not our friend. - (marlowe) - (9)
             The gravest mistake of the '60s peace movement . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (8)
                 I came of age in the immediate aftermath of that. - (marlowe)
                 But we must all remember... - (mmoffitt)
                 Why just the sixties? - (Ashton) - (5)
                     It was all a lie, Ashton. - (mmoffitt) - (4)
                         Exaggeration. - (Ashton) - (3)
                             I remain dubious. - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                                 Many were very serious - and some still are. - (Andrew Grygus)
                                 An original explanation! and maybe, pretty good :-\ufffd - (Ashton)
         perhaps it worked - (tablizer) - (3)
             It Worked - (gdaustin)
             Time's Man of the Century. - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                 Remember our discussions - but I forget: Who finally got it? - (CRConrad)
         dont equate taliban and bin laden - (boxley) - (7)
             I am ignorant. - (mmoffitt)
             As soon as the Taliban hand over bin Laden... - (marlowe) - (5)
                 You've heard what the custom is re 'guests' - (Ashton) - (4)
                     A plausible scenario - (wharris2) - (3)
                         The don't-know-where-he-is dodge only works if we let it. - (marlowe) - (2)
                             Who cares where 'he' is - (Fearless Freep) - (1)
                                 Yes, 'Fundament-al' problem with such an obsession is: - (Ashton)

Don’t look at me in that tone of voice!
49 ms