Happy Birthday!

I'd say he brought about understanding between both governments that allowed for the disscussions to be held that led the way for democracy to take foot in Russia.
 
Reagan didn't win the war on communism in Russia. He was there at its end.

"Millions upon millions of soldiers, refugees, diplomats, activists, saboteurs, reformers, union members both behind the iron curtain and in the west, intellectuals, freethinkers, environmentalists, protesters, writers, artists, most of all innocent bystanders, and on and on and on, of ALL political stripes (even communists themselves) fought, agitated, where tortured and died in the battle of attrition to bring down the dark age known as communism. "

"Reagan trained every fascist terrorist group in Latin America, every nun-raping, genociding, cocaine-smuggling crack-Hitler on the entire continent. Remember those American nuns raped to death by Reagans "freedom fighters"? All morals aside, this was counterproductive. "

http://pittsburgh.indymedia.org/news/2003/11/10967_comment.php


If people wanted to compile evidence for their being the existence of God, they might seek to include the fact that one of the world's most vicious, horrific leaders is currently suffering from a kind of living death known as Alzheimers Disease. It's likely that he'll be dead before his next birthday, but for the anguish, suffering, and murder that he has been a part of I would be happy to see him suffer until the end of time.
 
Pollux is right the Soviet Union collapsed from the inside not by Reagan. PAH! What Reagan did was increase tensions with the USSR, that's all. What brought the USSR was a combination of Stalinist stagnation, ill thought of reforms by Gorbi, and declining living standards right across the board. It is generally accepted that if the USSR had another Stalinist in power, not a reformer like Gorbi. The CCCP would still be around today. Reagan brought the worst out of American politics, and with the PNAC crowd, and neo-conservativism rampant, we now know of the colossal "intelligence" failure these presidents presided over the oval office.
 
Cowboy:
Good birthday wishes to the man who destroyed the murderous Soviet empire.

Its amazing to me how easy its been for this country to claim superiority. And that nasty habit started when its people stole candy from a diseased, royal lunatic who couldn't even run his own empire let alone a whole country oceans away.

Never mind that the socialist visionary policy is as stupidly futile as Castro is.
Never mind that for years all of Russia was rotting on the inside.
Never mind that it was all that Bolshevik-KBG bullshit that was its own undoing.
Never mind that this doctrine denies the simple, natural laws of humanity.
Never mind that Regan just happend to plant himself in front of walls already crumbling.



But at least every year all the cattle get to gather around barbeques and firecrackers celebrating their "victory". At least we have footage of a flashy president with his finger up firmly 'demanding' that Gorbachev bring the walls down.

* victory, not vicory.
 
Last edited:
gendanken said:
celebrating their "vicory".

Normally I don't ask about spelling, but given that you've already referred to Reagan as a "royal lunatic who couldn't even run his own empire", I have to ask.

Is this a misspelling of "victory" or "viceroy"?
 
A lot of people on this forum are too young to have firsthand memories of Reagan so their viewpoint is very skewed regarding his persona.

Reagan was The Great Communicator, whether you liked his economic policies or not. One of Reagan's best assets was his ability to play the fool until his opponents felt comfortable being frank with him, then he would show what he was holding. It's a very disarming strategic method of communication, and certainly a skill not everyone can master. It's all poker...
 
Thanks for the update captain obvious. I haven't seen the news in twenty years.

If you're suggesting that 20 years ago Reagan wasn't capable of lucidity, you're on crack. jk. ;)
 
I'm sure that, if one of your presidents turned out to have a brain disease that caused unpredictable behaviour, the US government wouldn't try to hide it in any way.
 
A lot of people on this forum are too young to have firsthand memories of Reagan so their viewpoint is very skewed regarding his persona.

True. I was born in '87. I think the earliest political memory I have is of a presidential debate for the 1992 election with Bush, Perot, and Clinton. While I don't remember this exactly, my parents say that I thought Perot was an alien, and as a result I was hysterical and in tears. Anyway, I don't remember seeing Reagan live on the tele.

From what I've gathered, his actions (Iran-Contra among them) suggest that he was either a--

+Horrific Despot
+Moron under the control of his cronies, much like our current President

I've also heard that while he was especially nice in public, he was an asshole in private. It's likely that of the two choices above, he was a combination of the two.
 
Bigblue:
Normally I don't ask about spelling, but given that you've already referred to Reagan as a "royal lunatic who couldn't even run his own empire", I have to ask.

Is this a misspelling of "victory" or "viceroy"?

Damn it blue. Its a carry over from some other thread of mine about King George the third suffering from prophyria that made him a lunatic.

I'll link you if I feel like it.

This keyboard is a boil- its supposed to be 'victory'. Hold on.
(and btw- the current president does have a brain disease)

Guth:
She means george the 3rd i think.
Yup.

Pollux:
I've also heard that while he was especially nice in public, he was an asshole in private. It's likely that of the two choices above, he was a combination of the two
No- the assholes in private are all Bushes. The only thing annoying on Regean(other than this trumped up charge of his being responsible for breaking down Russia) (as if).......... is Nancy Regan.
 
Reagan was an illiterate, under the control of his security council, his wife, incapable of independent thought, a double dyed lying despot who armed both Iraq and Iran, irrespective of the fact that both were in conflict at the time, destroyed any real chance for southern american countries to achieve true social justice, invaded that real threat to western civilisation, namely Grenada. Do Americans really hold up this idiot as an icon?
 
Yes they do, Americans see Reagan as the man who brought America back from the brink. The man who brought American exceptionalism back to the table, and a renewed sense of Americana, he was a man who did not cease to attack the communist bloc and her satellites (at any cost). He brought America to the forefront of the Arms race (it is argued that the USSR was more powerful then the US militarily in the 70's), and had envisioned a NMD shield, which was not feasible then and not today, but the mere symbolism was enough to show American technical superiority. He brought back "morals" to the white house, you gotta love a man who invades Central America who knows how man times. That special relationship that the US and the UK shared was re-kindled with Thatcher and Reagan. I think that Reagan was one of the worst leaders of the 20th century for his policies and his effects. But to the American ppl Reagan offered that 1930's Hollywood type, strong, dramatic, and charismatic. But sadly it was merely a stage it wasn't the reality.
 
Undecided:
But to the American ppl Reagan offered that 1930's Hollywood type, strong, dramatic, and charismatic. But sadly it was merely a stage it wasn't the reality.
Every mook in the white house is the aftermath of charismatic 'voting'. Jackson was Hollywood, Kennedy was hollywood, Clintons and Bushes......Hollywood. America 'votes's simply charminlgy, yes?


We don't even need a president.
 
Nixon, LBJ, Eisenhower, Ford, Bush sr. and jr. are not Hollywood. Democrats are usually Hollywood material; Reagan is the only Republican president that is Hollywood.
 
Back
Top