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.
The biggest part... not taking away from the role the others played though. He (Reagan) talked about the fall of the Berlin wall for almost three decades before it actually happened and he set forth from day one in his presidency to achieve that goal, maybe more than three decades, but that's just using the actual facts I can find and know about.
When asked about what to do about the Soviet he summed it up "we win, they lose".
Certainly Reagan policies were not the only reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union which ultimately lead to the fall of the Berlin wall but they played a major part.
Reagan's policies and himself were minor players in the downfall of Communism and the collapse of Berlin Wall, but revisionist pro-American patriotic historians says otherwise.
Reagan's policies and himself were minor players in the downfall of Communism and the collapse of Berlin Wall
Communism/Socialism fails.
The May Flower pilgrims were socialists/cooperatists at first and 1/3 starved & died before having to resort to private enterprise. China is totalitarial yet has free markets. Cuba, Belarus, N.Korea, Vietnam, Chavez's Venezuela, Laos, Burma, are examples of how state controlled economies, how collectivism, how communism fails.
Capitalism is to free markets as socialism is to state controlled (communism).
Reagan's policies and himself were minor players in the downfall of Communism and the collapse of Berlin Wall, but revisionist pro-American patriotic historians says otherwise.
Well you're the second one to suggest I'm wrong but give no reason why. Explain yourself or what you consider the reason for the collapse. It's very easy to sit there and be critical of someone else's point of view without providing your own.
Well you're the second one to suggest I'm wrong but give no reason why. Explain yourself or what you consider the reason for the collapse. It's very easy to sit there and be critical of someone else's point of view without providing your own.
Communism in USSR was on route to failure after Brezhnev, massive discontent, citizens in satellite state wanted Soviet influence gone, etc. Gorbachev's perestroika and glasnost were preparations to alleviate the pain. Reagan's "Tear down this wall" maxim was minor and USSR was going to disintegrate without him saying that, but didn't stop Western media and historians from hyping up Reagan's almonst-non-involvement for the Americans.
Communism in USSR was on route to failure after Brezhnev, massive discontent, citizens in satellite state wanted Soviet influence gone, etc. Gorbachev's perestroika and glasnost were preparations to alleviate the pain. Reagan's "Tear down this wall" maxim was minor and USSR was going to disintegrate without him saying that, but didn't stop Western media and historians from hyping up Reagan's almonst-non-involvement for the Americans.
Hardly. Gorbachev was the only answer they had to the Reagan challenge. A challenge militarily, politically, economically, technologically and religiously. In fact Gorbachev only won by a 1 vote margin, Andrei Gromyko.
Quote:
Mr. Gromyko had been the instrument of Mr. Gorbachev's accession to the leadership of the Soviet Communist Party in March 1985, going before his aging colleagues in the Politburo then to tell them that it was time to cede the leadership to a younger man.
So after getting oil production increased which crippled their ability to bring money in, sending religious messages to the captive nations, trade embargoes, a war in Afghanistan that humiliated them (which was funded by our CIA) and SDI they could no longer keep up with military spending which now consumed more than 50% of their income. They had no money for SDI and their own people were starving, not that they had much care for humanitarian issues. To believe the communist suddenly thought communism was a bad idea is just plain intellectually dishonest and dismisses almost a century of communism and its beliefs along with it's millions that it killed or starved to death. They had no other choice and in fact he tried other choices first before coming to the realization:
Quote:
Gorbachev quickly set about consolidating his personal power in the Soviet leadership. His primary domestic goal was to resuscitate the stagnant Soviet economy after its years of drift and low growth during Leonid Brezhnev's tenure in power (1964–82). To this end, he called for rapid technological modernization and increased worker productivity, and he tried to make the cumbersome Soviet bureaucracy more efficient and responsive.
When these superficial changes failed to yield tangible results, Gorbachev in 1987–88 proceeded to initiate deeper reforms of the Soviet economic and political system.
KING: You liked him right away?
REAGAN: Yes, and I told him, for example, that -- we were there. I said, we don't mistrust each other because we're armed -- this is a quote of someone else -- we're armed because we mistrust each other. So in addition to talking about reducing the weaponry and so forth, why don't we see if we can reduce the causes of mistrust. And I said, the only thing left to us otherwise is to go back to an arms race, and then I made my declaration. I looked him right in the eye and I said, and that's a race you can't win. There is no way we're going to allow you to maintain a superiority in weapons over us.
In Iceland, last October, we had one moment of opportunity that the Soviets dashed because they sought to cripple our Strategic Defense Initiative, SDI. I wouldn’t let them do it then; I won’t let them do it now or in the future. This is the most positive and promising defense program we have undertaken. It’s the path, for both sides, to a safer future——a system that defends human life instead of threatening it. SDI will go forward. The United States has made serious, fair, and far—reaching proposals to the Soviet Union, and this is a moment of rare opportunity for arms reduction.
Remarks at the Brandenburg Gate
delivered 12 June 1987, West Berlin
General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate.
Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate.
Mr. Gorbachev -- Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!
The only thing Gorbachev did do that helped the wall fall was nothing. He helped the most he possibly could by not calling in tanks. He had no choice because all his cards were played.
Quote:
Address at Moscow State University (May 31, 1988)
At the same time, we should remember that reform that is not institutionalized will always be insecure. Such freedom will always be looking over its shoulder. A bird on a tether, no matter how long the rope, can always be pulled back. And that is why, in my conversation with General Secretary Gorbachev, I have spoken of how important it is to institutionalize change—to put guarantees on reform. And we've been talking together about one sad reminder of a divided world: the Berlin Wall. It's time to remove the barriers that keep people apart.
September 10, 1989
Hungarian government opens border for East German refugees
November 9, 1989
Berlin Wall is opened
December 22, 1989
Brandenburg Gate is opened
October 3, 1990
Germany is reunited
So your argument is "shallow", do you see the irony here?
Certainly Reagan policies were not the only reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union which ultimately lead to the fall of the Berlin wall but they played a major part.
Idahogie's "shallow" means he doesn't like the truth but can't refute it... and his ideology won't let him admit it. So he must make up inaccurate descriptions (aka "lies") to try to denigrate the truth.
Back to the subject:
The main thing that brought down the Berlin Wall (and Soviet communism in general) was its own poor economic performance. The entire country finally decided they had had enough lies, broken promises, etc., and revolted. And the govt found it could not resist the will of its own people. Reagan's policies helped, by letting the United States increase its productivity and prosperity, so much that we were able to mount a huge arms race. The Soviets tried to spend vast sums to compete, and ran themselves into bankruptcy.
Even if the arms race hadn't happened, they would have wound up bankrupt and out of power anyway. Reagan just gave them an extra push, and made it happen sooner.
----------------------------------
Note that the Soviet people getting tired of the lies, broken promises, unrealistic predictions, and economic failures of their socialist govt, is closely parallelled by the way the American people are starting to get tired of the lies, broken promises, unrealistic predictions, and economic failures of the socialist Obama administration in this country.
Those who ignore history, are doomed to repeat it.
Last edited by Little-Acorn; 11-10-2009 at 04:11 PM..
Even if the arms race hadn't happened, they would have wound up bankrupt and out of power anyway. Reagan just gave them an extra push, and made it happen sooner.
----------------------------------
The Soviet system had been on the brink of bankruptcy since it's inception. Virtually no Sovietologist believed the soviet system was illegitimate. That push was more like a shove with a mac truck. When Reagan came into office they (the Soviets) had nuclear and military superiority. We had a sorely diminished military that was in a severe need of being rebuilt if it were to compete with the Soviets. If the military had not been built up then the Soviets could have continued the same way they always had by strong arming governments and making promises, not keeping those promises and enjoying all the spoils from those promises.
Quote:
Ronald Reagan's Farewell Address to the Nation Oval Office
January 11, 1989
But back in the 1960s, when I began, it seemed to me that we'd begun reversing the order of things--that through more and more rules and regulations and confiscatory taxes, the government was taking more of our money, more of our options, and more of our freedom. I went into politics in part to put up my hand and say, "Stop." I was a citizen politician, and it seemed the right thing for a citizen to do. I think we have stopped a lot of what needed stopping. And I hope we have once again reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There's a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.
Nothing is less free than pure communism, and yet we have, the past few years, forged a satisfying new closeness with the Soviet Union. I've been asked if this isn't a gamble, and my answer is no because we're basing our actions not on words but deeds. The detente of the 1970s was based not on actions but promises. They'd promise to treat their own people and the people of the world better. But the gulag was still the gulag, and the state was still expansionist, and they still waged proxy wars in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
It was indeed economics.. The Soviets suffered from stagflation just like the US did in the 70s, but never recovered. Reagan encouraged the Saudis to triple oil production, leading to a hugely glutted oil market and dirt cheap oil. Since the #1 Soviet export was AK4.. er.. Oil, their economy collapsed soon after the bottom dropped out of the market.
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.
A Wise Man
