Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I listed three actions of Reagan that many historians and oberserves of the time (on both sides of the Cold War) point to as actions that forced the Soviet economy to its knees...which then resulted in the reforms of Gorbachev in an attempt to keep the people happy...which then led to the unravelling of the entire Soviet system. Reagan's actions were nowhere near singularly responsible for anything, however, they were a critical part of forcing things to happen when they did.
Reagan's domestic economic policies, from his increased spending to his tax reforms most certainly had a massive and positive impact on the US economy. US GDP was 2.7 trillion in 1980 and 5.1 trillion in 1988, an 88% increase.
None of that takes into account the impact Reagan had on making people "believe in America" again. I look at Reagan and FDR in the same light on this one. FDR has plenty one can criticize. He is not fully deserving of the liberal cult of personality that has been created around him. However, he made people feel better and believe in the country again and there is a lot to be said for that.
My politics lean conservative, but I don't consider Reagan a hero. I do consider him to be one of the most effective American leaders of the 20th century. If you noticed, my personal list contains both Reagan and FDR. I may be a little more "Reagan" in my personal politics, but both were effective leaders, neither were perfect and neither really deserves to idolized like they have been, no president does.
Gorbachev made the mistake of combining economic reform with political reform. People took their freedom and ran with it. He would have been better of doing what China did and reform the economy but keep totalitarian state in place. However, there is very little evidence Gorbachev's policies were a reaction to Reagan. There is even less evidence that the Soviets spent more money on the military in response to the US buildup. In fact, there is good evidence Soviet spending remained the same in the 1980s!!!! The US military buildup was essentially a big waste of money. Same goes for the tax cuts. Certainly when you have large military spending and tax cuts you will get an economic boost, however as another poster already mentioned, there were other pieces to the equation. The tax cuts and military spending were very inefficient and the resources could have been spent elsewhere. A mediocre at best Presidency.
I love how it is often ignored that Reagan the tough guy negotiated with terrorists and spend his entire second term in negotiation over arms. Reagan even gave Gorbachev a freedom award in 1992!
Last edited by jobseeker2013; 12-23-2013 at 11:46 PM..
I listed three actions of Reagan that many historians and oberserves of the time (on both sides of the Cold War) point to as actions that forced the Soviet economy to its knees...which then resulted in the reforms of Gorbachev in an attempt to keep the people happy...which then led to the unravelling of the entire Soviet system. Reagan's actions were nowhere near singularly responsible for anything, however, they were a critical part of forcing things to happen when they did.
Reagan's domestic economic policies, from his increased spending to his tax reforms most certainly had a massive and positive impact on the US economy. US GDP was 2.7 trillion in 1980 and 5.1 trillion in 1988, an 88% increase.
None of that takes into account the impact Reagan had on making people "believe in America" again. I look at Reagan and FDR in the same light on this one. FDR has plenty one can criticize. He is not fully deserving of the liberal cult of personality that has been created around him. However, he made people feel better and believe in the country again and there is a lot to be said for that.
My politics lean conservative, but I don't consider Reagan a hero. I do consider him to be one of the most effective American leaders of the 20th century. If you noticed, my personal list contains both Reagan and FDR. I may be a little more "Reagan" in my personal politics, but both were effective leaders, neither were perfect and neither really deserves to idolized like they have been, no president does.
Gorbachev made the mistake of combining economic reform with political reform. People took their fredom and ran with it. He would been better of doing what china did and reform the economy but keep the totalitarian state in place. However, there is very little evidence Gorbachev's policies were a reaction to Reagan. There is even less evidence that the Soviets spent more money on the military in response to the US buildup. In fact, there is good evidence Soviet spending remained the same in the 1980s!!!! The US military buildup was essentially a big waste of money. There has been an entire industry creating the myth of Reagan. Why not? It sells copies but it does not make it so.
Same goes for the tax cuts. Certainly when you have large military spending and tax cuts you will get an economic boost, however as another poster already mentioned, here were other pieces to the equation. However, the tax cuts military spending were very inefficient and the resources could have been spent elsewhere. A mediocre at best Presidency.
I love how it is often ignored that Reagan the tough guy negotiated with terrorists and spend his entire second term in negotiation over arms. Reagan gave Gorbachev a freedom award in 1992!
more "union" troops died than confederate. look at the new york riots. forced conscription,
forced membership in "the" united states is no longer "these united" states. by definition
membership in the union was voluntary. leaving the union was a legal act. issuing worthless
greenbacks. in my opinion, the war between the states was the beginning of the end for
freedom in this country. 1871 the federal entity incorporated, ending all pretense as some
form of assembly of free men anymore. it is not. that is one thing abe lincoln made damn
sure of.
An appropriate response here would be prolonged, outright laughter.
Eisenhower was the laziest president. He spent 80% of his time on the golf course andhe left decisions up to Nixon whom he was nurturing to be president. You see what we got from him.
Eisenhower was the laziest president. He spent 80% of his time on the golf course andhe left decisions up to Nixon whom he was nurturing to be president. You see what we got from him.
Aaah, the America voter! There is no limit........
Eisenhower was the laziest president. He spent 80% of his time on the golf course andhe left decisions up to Nixon whom he was nurturing to be president. You see what we got from him.
Ike was far from lazy when it came to foreign policy.
Eisenhower was the laziest president. He spent 80% of his time on the golf course andhe left decisions up to Nixon whom he was nurturing to be president. You see what we got from him.
I read that this was a deliberate façade that Ike put up. He wanted to portray himself as the relaxed, moderate, easygoing alternative to Taft. But historians who have studied his log books have concluded that behind the scenes, Ike was just as much hands-on as any other prez.
Nixon called Ike the "most devious" man he'd ever met. He meant it as a supreme compliment.
I read that this was a deliberate façade that Ike put up. He wanted to portray himself as the relaxed, moderate, easygoing alternative to Taft. But historians who have studied his log books have concluded that behind the scenes, Ike was just as much hands-on as any other prez.
Nixon called Ike the "most devious" man he'd ever met. He meant it as a supreme compliment.
No, he didn't. He could barely tolerate Nixon...had trouble hiding his contempt.
I read that this was a deliberate façade that Ike put up. He wanted to portray himself as the relaxed, moderate, easygoing alternative to Taft. But historians who have studied his log books have concluded that behind the scenes, Ike was just as much hands-on as any other prez.
Nixon called Ike the "most devious" man he'd ever met. He meant it as a supreme compliment.
I think Ike was a sharp man who was a good President. I rank him #6 out of the top #7 Presidents.
No one can really understand Eisenhower without understanding both World War II and the 1950's. Any country that fights a "world war" goes through an enormous struggle. A huge amount of energy was expended. I believe somewhere on the order of 26 million Americans served in some capacity in the armed forces before the war officially ended. People at home had to deal with gasoline rationing and, in fact, rationing of just about everything. There was no domestic production of automobiles. The national speed limit was set at 35 miles an hour to save gasoline. Major sporting events were cancelled for the duration of the war.
It should come as no surprise that after such an event that people want a period of rest and relaxation. They believe they are entitled to a "vacation" of sorts and this is what much of the 1950's was for America. Returning veterans wanted to get married and start a family. People wanted to focus on education and getting a good job. These were the priorities of the time.
Eisenhower, who had been the Supreme Commander of American Forces in Europe during World War II, understood keenly what the country's mood was and what people wanted. That's the kind of presidency he conducted. At times, it did seem as though he was more interested in golf than in running the country. In reality, he gave the USA the kind of leadership it expected during this time period. His first moves in office were to put pressure on North Korea to end the Korean War. Its rumored he threatened the use of nuclear weapons. Whatever he said, the ceasefire at Panmunjon was signed within the fisrt year he had taken office. Another example, would be the passage and signature of the Interstate Highway Act of 1956. Eisenhower, during an early time in the military had attempted to convoy troops across the United States. He realized just how bad roads and highways in much of America were. He had also had an opportunity during World War II, to see the German Autobahn System. Some people disdain the interstate highway system because they believe mass transportation would have been a better option. In a country like America, the interstate highway system was really the only solution. Eisenhower saw that and pushed it. Eisenhower didn't push civil rights particularly. However, he had the good sense to understand that as the nation's chief executive it was his duty to execute the laws of the land. When he stood up in 1957 and demanded enforcement of court decrees mandating desegregation of Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, the entire nation listened and did so because no figure in the country possessed more authority than President Eisenhower did. Eisenhower stated his biggest regret while President was not obtaining some kind of nuclear arms control deal with the Soviet Union. However, in the last years of his presidency, tensions with the Soviet Union did abate a bit. He met with USSR leader, Nikita Khruschev, and a long process began that would culminate in the 60's with a Test Ban Treaty and in the 1970's with a Strategic Arms Limitation Agreement.
Eisenhower's prestige that he earned as a general enabled him to do many things that other men simply could not have done.
A final factor that should be pointed out is that by the 1950's, Eisenhower's health was starting to decline. He had at least one heart attack while President. His recovery from this was slow and laborious. Many people who experience a coronary, suffer depression afterwards. Eisenhower went through this. As he got older and as his health declined, he probably was less functional as President.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MassVt
No, he didn't. He could barely tolerate Nixon...had trouble hiding his contempt.
In fact, Eisenhower didn't care much for Nixon. He and Nixon were fundamentally different people.
Ike liked parties and he liked to socialize with others. He had a great number of friends and had risen high in the military, among other reasons, because people instinctively were drawn to him and enjoyed his company.
Nixon was cut from a very different cloth. Eisenhower never could understand how a man that had come as far as Nixon seemed to have very few friends and acquaintances. At one point, when Nixon ran for President in 1960, a reporter asked Eisenhower to name some "good things or qualities about Nixon". Eisenhower's response was memorable. He stated: "Give me a week and I will think of something".
In many ways, these two men were polar opposites. Its no surprise to me that Eisenhower didn't think much of Nixon.
No, he didn't. He could barely tolerate Nixon...had trouble hiding his contempt.
No he didn't what? Didn't use the strategy I mentioned? What's that got to do with his opinion of Nixon?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Aaah, the America voter! There is no limit........
