John McCain looked into Putin's eyes and saw one thing: KGB.
Former POW and war hero John McCain has a foul temper and low intolerance for evil. He'll make George W. Bush look like a Code-Pink protester.
Ah, yes. JC as McCain fan #1. Don't make me bump your threads declaring him the anti-christ.
How the West lost Russia: APPEASEMENT!
Feckless, gutless Euro-trash appeasement!
uke1:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How the West Fueled Putin's Sense of Impunity
By GARRY KASPAROV
August 15, 2008; Page A13
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121876037443642795.html?mod=rss_opinion_main
Russia's invasion of Georgia reminded me of a conversation I had three years ago in Moscow with a high-ranking European Union official. Russia was much freer then, but President Vladimir Putin's onslaught against democratic rights was already underway.
"What would it take," I asked, "for Europe to stop treating Putin like a democrat? If all opposition parties are banned? Or what if they started shooting people in the street?" The official shrugged and replied that even in such cases, there would be little the EU could do. He added: "Staying engaged will always be the best hope for the people of both Europe and Russia."
The citizens of Georgia would likely disagree. Russia's invasion was the direct result of nearly a decade of Western helplessness and delusion. Inexperienced and cautious in the international arena at the start of his reign in 2000, Mr. Putin soon learned he could get away with anything without repercussions from the EU or America.
Russia reverted to a KGB dictatorship while Mr. Putin was treated as an equal at G-8 summits. Italy's Silvio Berlusconi and Germany's Gerhardt Schroeder became Kremlin business partners. Mr. Putin discovered democratic credentials could be bought and sold just like everything else. The final confirmation was the acceptance of Dmitry Medvedev in the G-8, and on the world stage. The leaders of the Free World welcomed Mr. Putin's puppet, who had been anointed in blatantly faked elections.
On Tuesday, French President Nicolas Sarkozy sprinted to Moscow to broker a ceasefire agreement. He was allowed to go through the motions, perhaps as a reward for his congratulatory phone call to Mr. Putin after our December parliamentary "elections." But just a few months ago Mr. Sarkozy was in Moscow as a supplicant, lobbying for Renault. How much credibility does he really have in Mr. Putin's eyes?
In reality, Mr. Sarkozy is attempting to remedy a crisis he helped bring about. Last April, France opposed the American push to fast-track Georgia's North Atlantic Treaty Organization membership. This was one of many missed opportunities that collectively built up Mr. Putin's sense of impunity. In this way the G-7 nations aided and abetted the Kremlin's ambitions.
Georgia blundered into a trap, although its imprudent aggression in South Ossetia was overshadowed by Mr. Putin's desire to play the strongman. Russia seized the chance to go on the offensive in Georgian territory while playing the victim/hero. Mr. Putin has long been eager to punish Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili for his lack of respect both for Georgia's old master Russia, and for Mr. Putin personally. (Popular rumor has it that the Georgian president once mocked his peer as "Lilli-Putin.")
Although Mr. Saakashvili could hardly be called a model democrat, his embrace of Europe and the West is considered a very bad example by the Kremlin. The administrations of the Georgian breakaway areas of Abkhazia and South Ossetia are stocked, top to bottom, with bureaucrats from the Russian security services.
Throughout the conflict, the Kremlin-choreographed message in the Russian media has been one of hysteria. The news presents Russia as surrounded by enemies on all sides, near and far, and the military intervention in Georgia as essential to protect the lives and interests of Russians. It is also often spoken of as just the first step, with enclaves in Ukraine next on the menu. Attack dogs like Russian nationalist politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky are used to test and whip up public opinion. Kremlin-sponsored ultranationalist ideologue Alexander Dugin went on the radio to say Russian forces "should not stop until they are stopped." The damage done by such rhetoric is very slow to heal.
The conflict also threatens to poison Russia's relationship with Europe and America for years to come. Can such a belligerent state be trusted as the guarantor of Europe's energy supply? Republican presidential candidate John McCain has been derided for his strong stance against Mr. Putin, including a proposal to kick Russia out of the G-8. Will his critics now admit that the man they called an antiquated cold warrior was right all along?
The conventional wisdom of Russia's "invulnerability" serves as an excuse for inaction. President Bush's belatedly toughened language is welcome, but actual sanctions must now be considered. The Kremlin's ruling clique has vital interests -- i.e. assets -- abroad and those interests are vulnerable.
The blood of those killed in this conflict is on the hands of radical nationalists, thoughtless politicians, opportunistic oligarchs and the leaders of the Free World who value gas and oil more than principles. More lives will be lost unless strong moral lines are drawn to reinforce the shattered lines of the map.
Mr. Kasparov, leader of The Other Russia coalition, is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal.
Feckless, gutless Euro-trash appeasement!
uke1: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How the West Fueled Putin's Sense of Impunity
By GARRY KASPAROV
August 15, 2008; Page A13
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121876037443642795.html?mod=rss_opinion_main
Russia's invasion of Georgia reminded me of a conversation I had three years ago in Moscow with a high-ranking European Union official. Russia was much freer then, but President Vladimir Putin's onslaught against democratic rights was already underway.
"What would it take," I asked, "for Europe to stop treating Putin like a democrat? If all opposition parties are banned? Or what if they started shooting people in the street?" The official shrugged and replied that even in such cases, there would be little the EU could do. He added: "Staying engaged will always be the best hope for the people of both Europe and Russia."
The citizens of Georgia would likely disagree. Russia's invasion was the direct result of nearly a decade of Western helplessness and delusion. Inexperienced and cautious in the international arena at the start of his reign in 2000, Mr. Putin soon learned he could get away with anything without repercussions from the EU or America.
Russia reverted to a KGB dictatorship while Mr. Putin was treated as an equal at G-8 summits. Italy's Silvio Berlusconi and Germany's Gerhardt Schroeder became Kremlin business partners. Mr. Putin discovered democratic credentials could be bought and sold just like everything else. The final confirmation was the acceptance of Dmitry Medvedev in the G-8, and on the world stage. The leaders of the Free World welcomed Mr. Putin's puppet, who had been anointed in blatantly faked elections.
On Tuesday, French President Nicolas Sarkozy sprinted to Moscow to broker a ceasefire agreement. He was allowed to go through the motions, perhaps as a reward for his congratulatory phone call to Mr. Putin after our December parliamentary "elections." But just a few months ago Mr. Sarkozy was in Moscow as a supplicant, lobbying for Renault. How much credibility does he really have in Mr. Putin's eyes?
In reality, Mr. Sarkozy is attempting to remedy a crisis he helped bring about. Last April, France opposed the American push to fast-track Georgia's North Atlantic Treaty Organization membership. This was one of many missed opportunities that collectively built up Mr. Putin's sense of impunity. In this way the G-7 nations aided and abetted the Kremlin's ambitions.
Georgia blundered into a trap, although its imprudent aggression in South Ossetia was overshadowed by Mr. Putin's desire to play the strongman. Russia seized the chance to go on the offensive in Georgian territory while playing the victim/hero. Mr. Putin has long been eager to punish Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili for his lack of respect both for Georgia's old master Russia, and for Mr. Putin personally. (Popular rumor has it that the Georgian president once mocked his peer as "Lilli-Putin.")
Although Mr. Saakashvili could hardly be called a model democrat, his embrace of Europe and the West is considered a very bad example by the Kremlin. The administrations of the Georgian breakaway areas of Abkhazia and South Ossetia are stocked, top to bottom, with bureaucrats from the Russian security services.
Throughout the conflict, the Kremlin-choreographed message in the Russian media has been one of hysteria. The news presents Russia as surrounded by enemies on all sides, near and far, and the military intervention in Georgia as essential to protect the lives and interests of Russians. It is also often spoken of as just the first step, with enclaves in Ukraine next on the menu. Attack dogs like Russian nationalist politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky are used to test and whip up public opinion. Kremlin-sponsored ultranationalist ideologue Alexander Dugin went on the radio to say Russian forces "should not stop until they are stopped." The damage done by such rhetoric is very slow to heal.
The conflict also threatens to poison Russia's relationship with Europe and America for years to come. Can such a belligerent state be trusted as the guarantor of Europe's energy supply? Republican presidential candidate John McCain has been derided for his strong stance against Mr. Putin, including a proposal to kick Russia out of the G-8. Will his critics now admit that the man they called an antiquated cold warrior was right all along?
The conventional wisdom of Russia's "invulnerability" serves as an excuse for inaction. President Bush's belatedly toughened language is welcome, but actual sanctions must now be considered. The Kremlin's ruling clique has vital interests -- i.e. assets -- abroad and those interests are vulnerable.
The blood of those killed in this conflict is on the hands of radical nationalists, thoughtless politicians, opportunistic oligarchs and the leaders of the Free World who value gas and oil more than principles. More lives will be lost unless strong moral lines are drawn to reinforce the shattered lines of the map.
Mr. Kasparov, leader of The Other Russia coalition, is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal.
tsk tsk tsk
Could this be why Pootin is getting antsy?
Not a word about this in Joes big-assed article either...not a cheep...
-----------------------------------------------
15 August 2008
<TABLE class=storycontent cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=2>US and Poland sign defence deal
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=storybody><!-- S BO --><!-- S IIMA --><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=226 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>
The missiles would be similar to those based in Alaska and California
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!-- E IIMA --><!-- S SF -->
Poland has signed a preliminary deal with the US on plans to host part of its new missile defence shield.
Under the agreement, the US will install 10 interceptor missiles at a base on the Baltic coast in return for help strengthening Polish air defences.
The US says the system will protect itself and Europe against long range missile attacks by "rogue states".
Correspondents say the deal is expected to heighten tension between the US and Russia, already strained over Georgia. <!-- E SF -->
Moscow has said the project will upset the military balance in Europe and has warned it will be forced to redirect its missiles at Poland.
<!-- S IBOX --><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=231 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=5>
</TD><TD class=sibtbg>
We agreed this negotiating phase a week ago, which was... before the events in Georgia
Radoslaw Sikorski
Polish Foreign Minister
<!-- S ILIN -->Q&A: US missile defence
<!-- E ILIN --><!-- S ILIN -->Guide to planned US missile shield
<!-- E ILIN --><!-- S ILIN -->Deal cools Polish-Russian relations
<!-- E ILIN -->
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!-- E IBOX -->
However, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski told the BBC's World Tonight programme that the timing of the deal had nothing to do with the hostilities.
"We agreed this negotiating phase a week ago, which was... before the events in Georgia, and because of the US calendar there was some urgency," he said.
"But, what is crucial, and what decided the success of the talks over the last couple of days, was that the US offered us new proposals."
Unlike the US, Poland sees Russia as a bigger threat to its security than so-called rogue states such as Iran, the BBC's Adam Easton in Warsaw says.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is reported to have cancelled a scheduled visit to Poland shortly after the deal was announced.
Modernisation
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk announced the agreement on national television shortly before it was signed by Deputy Foreign Minister Andrzej Kremer and US chief negotiator John Rood.
Mr Tusk said Washington had agreed to meet Warsaw's main demands in exchange for hosting the 10 interceptor missiles in a former military base near Poland's Baltic Sea coast. <!-- Inline Embbeded Media --><!-- This is the embedded player component -->
<OBJECT id=bbc_emp_fmtj_embed_obj height=106 width=226 classid=clsid
27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000>
<embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/emp/2_3_3887/player.swf" width="226" height="106" id="bbc_emp_fmtj_embed_emb" name="embeddedPlayer_7562549" wmode="default" allowFullScreen="true" name="embeddedPlayer_7562549" flashvars="config=http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/emp/config/default.xml?v10&companionSize=300x30&companionType=adi&preroll=&config_settings_suppressItemKind=advert, ident&config_settings_autoPlay=false&config_settings_showPopoutButton=false&playlist=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Femp%2F7560000%2F7562500%2F7562549.xml&config_plugin_fmtjLiveStats_pageType=eav2&embedReferer=blockedReferrer&config_plugin_fmtjLiveStats_edition=Domestic&embedPageUrl=/1/hi/world/europe/7561926.stm&"/></OBJECT>
<!-- end of the embedded player component --><!-- END of Inline Embedded Media -->
In return, the US had agreed to help modernise the Polish armed forces and locate Patriot missiles and a garrison of US servicemen in Poland to beef up its air defences, Mr Tusk said.
Poland is reported to have demanded the extra security help as part of the deal after Moscow threatened to target its missiles at any eventual bases.
A White House spokeswoman said US President George W Bush "was very pleased with this development".
"In no way is the president's plan for missile defense aimed at Russia. In fact, it's just not even logically possible for it to be aimed at Russia given how Russia could overwhelm it," she told AFP. The US signed an agreement with the Czech Republic in July to base tracking radars there as part of the missile defence system. The US wants the sites to be in operation by about 2012.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7561926.stm
Could this be why Pootin is getting antsy?
Not a word about this in Joes big-assed article either...not a cheep...
-----------------------------------------------
15 August 2008
<TABLE class=storycontent cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=2>US and Poland sign defence deal
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=storybody><!-- S BO --><!-- S IIMA --><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=226 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!-- E IIMA --><!-- S SF -->
Poland has signed a preliminary deal with the US on plans to host part of its new missile defence shield.
Under the agreement, the US will install 10 interceptor missiles at a base on the Baltic coast in return for help strengthening Polish air defences.
The US says the system will protect itself and Europe against long range missile attacks by "rogue states".
Correspondents say the deal is expected to heighten tension between the US and Russia, already strained over Georgia. <!-- E SF -->
Moscow has said the project will upset the military balance in Europe and has warned it will be forced to redirect its missiles at Poland.
<!-- S IBOX --><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=231 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=5>
Radoslaw Sikorski
Polish Foreign Minister
<!-- S ILIN -->Q&A: US missile defence
<!-- E ILIN --><!-- S ILIN -->Guide to planned US missile shield
<!-- E ILIN --><!-- S ILIN -->Deal cools Polish-Russian relations
<!-- E ILIN -->
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!-- E IBOX -->
However, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski told the BBC's World Tonight programme that the timing of the deal had nothing to do with the hostilities.
"We agreed this negotiating phase a week ago, which was... before the events in Georgia, and because of the US calendar there was some urgency," he said.
"But, what is crucial, and what decided the success of the talks over the last couple of days, was that the US offered us new proposals."
Unlike the US, Poland sees Russia as a bigger threat to its security than so-called rogue states such as Iran, the BBC's Adam Easton in Warsaw says.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is reported to have cancelled a scheduled visit to Poland shortly after the deal was announced.
Modernisation
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk announced the agreement on national television shortly before it was signed by Deputy Foreign Minister Andrzej Kremer and US chief negotiator John Rood.
Mr Tusk said Washington had agreed to meet Warsaw's main demands in exchange for hosting the 10 interceptor missiles in a former military base near Poland's Baltic Sea coast. <!-- Inline Embbeded Media --><!-- This is the embedded player component -->
<OBJECT id=bbc_emp_fmtj_embed_obj height=106 width=226 classid=clsid
27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/emp/2_3_3887/player.swf" width="226" height="106" id="bbc_emp_fmtj_embed_emb" name="embeddedPlayer_7562549" wmode="default" allowFullScreen="true" name="embeddedPlayer_7562549" flashvars="config=http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/emp/config/default.xml?v10&companionSize=300x30&companionType=adi&preroll=&config_settings_suppressItemKind=advert, ident&config_settings_autoPlay=false&config_settings_showPopoutButton=false&playlist=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Femp%2F7560000%2F7562500%2F7562549.xml&config_plugin_fmtjLiveStats_pageType=eav2&embedReferer=blockedReferrer&config_plugin_fmtjLiveStats_edition=Domestic&embedPageUrl=/1/hi/world/europe/7561926.stm&"/></OBJECT>
<!-- end of the embedded player component --><!-- END of Inline Embedded Media -->
In return, the US had agreed to help modernise the Polish armed forces and locate Patriot missiles and a garrison of US servicemen in Poland to beef up its air defences, Mr Tusk said.
Poland is reported to have demanded the extra security help as part of the deal after Moscow threatened to target its missiles at any eventual bases.
A White House spokeswoman said US President George W Bush "was very pleased with this development".
"In no way is the president's plan for missile defense aimed at Russia. In fact, it's just not even logically possible for it to be aimed at Russia given how Russia could overwhelm it," she told AFP. The US signed an agreement with the Czech Republic in July to base tracking radars there as part of the missile defence system. The US wants the sites to be in operation by about 2012.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7561926.stm
I wouldn't be surprised if a backroom deal happens where the Ukraine is concerned.
Russia has very probably intimated they'll either put nukes into Cuba or a serious missile system into Iran if that happens.
And at the end of the day, why should they be the only one crapping their pants, spread the fear, spread the resources.
"Putin must have reasoned that, if we wouldn’t aggressively punish the Iranians and the Syrians for killing Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, we would certainly not risk American lives for Georgian territory."
I wonder if the author is aware that the Saudi Arabia sends far and away the most 'forieign insurgents' into Iraq/Afghanistan? 55% in fact are Saudis according to Evan Kohlmann, an NBC News terrorism expert. It's also estimated that 18% of the 'foreign insurgents' are Libyans (Another of our allies).
So, our 'allies' are sending 73% of the 'foreign insurgents' to Iraq but this genius wants us to attack Syria and Iran? Shall we "agressively puinish" the Saudis and Libyans first?
Meanwhile the Syrians fighting in Iraq is estimated at 8% and General David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, has praised Syria for steps it has taken to crack down on militants entering Iraq.
You need wings to stay above the misinformation.
I wonder if the author is aware that the Saudi Arabia sends far and away the most 'forieign insurgents' into Iraq/Afghanistan? 55% in fact are Saudis according to Evan Kohlmann, an NBC News terrorism expert. It's also estimated that 18% of the 'foreign insurgents' are Libyans (Another of our allies).
So, our 'allies' are sending 73% of the 'foreign insurgents' to Iraq but this genius wants us to attack Syria and Iran? Shall we "agressively puinish" the Saudis and Libyans first?
Meanwhile the Syrians fighting in Iraq is estimated at 8% and General David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, has praised Syria for steps it has taken to crack down on militants entering Iraq.
You need wings to stay above the misinformation.
<!--@@END_MEDIA@@--><table style="border-bottom: 1px dotted rgb(204, 204, 204); margin-top: 5px; margin-bottom: 5px;" width="440" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="border-right: 1px dotted rgb(204, 204, 204); height: 26px;" align="center"><table width="130" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr valign="middle"><td style="text-align: center; height: 26px;">VIEWS: </td><td style="font-weight: bold; text-align: left;">208955
</td></tr></tbody></table></td><td style="border-right: 1px dotted rgb(204, 204, 204); text-align: left; height: 26px;"> <script type="text/javascript"> var text = ""; text += '<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" style="margin:0 10px 0;">'; text += '<tr valign="middle"><td style="text-align:center;height:26px;">'; text += '
</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table>
Nixon was not an 'enlightened' conservative, paftraft.
Nixon's 'pragmatic' policies of appeasement did nothing but strengthen and increase Soviet aggression and military dominance the world over. His visit to Communist China was equally embarrassing for the United States.
For decades, nothing could bridge the gap between East and West. Only Ronald Reagan's comprehensive confrontational approach eventually brought the Evil Empire to his knees.
These Ron Paul "paleocons" live on their own planet, I'll tell ya. No mention in that article of a former head of state in the Ukraine being poisoned by Putin's KGB agents. No mention of Viktor Yuchenko, and many journalists who spoke out against the fascist regime in Russia who suffered a similar fate, courtesy Putin's henchmen.
Just a heavy of dose of time-tested "Blame-America imperialism" bullshit.
As a general rule, people don't have the stomach to confront evil, so they just deny evil exists, rewrite history and make up the storyline as they go along.
The reason is simple. As soon as you acknowledge the existence of evil, you have to act. And often those actions are ugly (there are rarely any 'good' options), require sacrifice and confrontation. (I can already see the usual anti "Joe C" vultures circling: "Hey Joe, why don't you go sign up and...")
"Pat Buchanan is an enlightened conservative...." :missingte
Pat Buchanan, Andrew Sullivan, Ariana Huffington and other "enlightened conservatives" should sign on to Obama's growing list of 300 foreign policy advisers. They'd fit in well with that moonbat head-in-the-sand defeatist Blame-America crowd.
Bottom line is this:
Putin's a BULLY and there's only one way to deal with a BULLY. Hit'em early and hit'em hard!
Kinda disagree Joe. Who would you rather have play chess with Putin today. My choice would be Nixon & Kissinger by a mile!
He trifled with Breshnev creating "Detante", surprised the world with the China Chapter of history someone had to eventually do it and he did, and in the 73' war Isreal vs. The Arab nations was able to stop our ally Isreal after they sufficiently destroyed the Egyptian forces & before Egypt was completely humiliated which in hindsight helped bring Egypt away from the Russian camp.
Just a guess but if Nixon would have beaten Kennedy intheir close 1960 election he would have not gotten us into the Vietnam mess Johnson got us into! If not for Watergate he would have gone down as a top tier president and if he was allowed to remain president the end of the Vietnam affair would not have ended in complete disaster like it did under Ford! I'll agree he was a pragmatic statesmen.
Mikheil Saakashvili & Bush in a tag team chess match against Kasparov
& Putin. Mismatch?
Al Gore, Pelosi & Obama "saving the planet" by not drilling for oil in America while Russia is drilling in every nook & cranny of their huge nation getting filthy rich & threatening Poland with a possible nuclear attack. Seems like bad news to me!
With all due respect, paftraft, I think you need to review your facts on "detente" and President Nixon in general...
Before Watergate, Richard Nixon was the sort of politician normally cited admiringly in the NYTs as a "moderate Republican."
Aside from "detente," Nixon imposed wage and price controls, established relations with Communist China (and thereby legitimized a murderous regime), created the Environmental Protection Agency, expanded the federal food stamp program, hired Henry Kissinger and put Harry Blackmun on the Supreme Court.
George W. Bush is far more a 'conservative' than Nixon ever was.
hno:Under "detente" (so called "containment"), a Marxist regime was established in Benin.
And what about that embarrassing defeat in Vietnam?
South Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos fell to Communism. Communist regimes were also established in Guinea-Bissau, Ethiopia, Angola, and Mozambique. Over the next decade, hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese "boat people" risked death at sea to flee Communism. In Cambodia, Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot murdered between one million and four million out of a population of seven million.
Under "detente" the world sat in silent horror watching the Soviets build the largest nuclear missile arsenal in the history of mankind.
Soviet expansionism was running rampant...until....
Reagan's ridicule of Kissinger's policies was so successful that President Ford had to order his campaign to stop using the word "detente."
In his book Diplomacy, Kissinger stated categorically that Reagan was the first American president to present "a direct moral challenge" to the Soviet Union -- which he described as an "enormous difference" from prior administrations. Reagan had abandoned the "gradualism" of every other Cold War president and took the offensive "both ideologically and geopolitically."
In a tribute to Ronald Reagan at the 2004 RNC, Kissinger finally conceded that "REAGAN WON THE COLD WAR."
"We won and the Soviets lost" (as Reagan once put it) and Reagan's interchangeable predecessors in the Oval Office had nothing to do with it.
Ronald Reagan was the first American president since the Russian Revolution in 1917 not to cede a single piece of geography to the Evil Empire. The Empire had been an economic basket case on the verge of "collapse" since it's inception, but the Kremlin always managed to bully the spineless useful idiots in the West into concessions and economic goodies -- in exchange for being left alone and not being 'bullied.'
hno: Ronald Reagan denounced such anti-American cowardice as far back as 1964 in a speech he gave on behalf of Barry Goldwater ("A Time of Choosing"), when he said this:
Exactly.
Those timeless principles still hold true today and we'd be very wise to learn from Reagan's courage and unbending moral certitude.
Ronald Reagan was a great president and a American hero because he believed in America, it's timeless values, principles and idealism and was willing to act on them. Some of his coercive policies against the Soviets even risked his own presidency (Iran-Contra) but I don't give a damn.
Without Reagan, the Berlin Wall would have never fallen (as Reagan envisioned) and we'd still be waiting for Kissinger's "detente" to kick in.
hno:Reagan happened to spend Russia into literal bankruptcy and the USSR collapsed. Reagan gets my respect for being the fallicitator of the demise of the lands of the czars no doubt about. My favorite move by Reagan was when he didn't give in to the Airport Controller Union the first president in my lifetime to stand up to the unions, it was a real breakthrough.
Nixon was the first guy I ever voted for and if wasn't conservative enough for you he was conservative enough for me. It was the era of the Rockefeller & Javits republicans in my area and Goldwater was so badly defeated in the election before Nixon that a crafty guy like Nixon realized he had to tend centrist in some areas to be elected.
I'm sure it doesn't matter but Nixon was a great statesmen, and so was Reagan they were my 2 favorite president's but if we could bring back one today to deal with the problems presented I'd bring back Nixon.
Nixon was the first guy I ever voted for and if wasn't conservative enough for you he was conservative enough for me. It was the era of the Rockefeller & Javits republicans in my area and Goldwater was so badly defeated in the election before Nixon that a crafty guy like Nixon realized he had to tend centrist in some areas to be elected.
I'm sure it doesn't matter but Nixon was a great statesmen, and so was Reagan they were my 2 favorite president's but if we could bring back one today to deal with the problems presented I'd bring back Nixon.
The reason Reagan could "stand up to the unions" in the case of PATCO is because it was illegal for them to strike, unlike the vast majority of labor unions.
It's one of the few moves by RR that I admire.
Fun Fact - Barman Jr in his first semester of a two year degree after which it's likely he'll be plugging into the FAA for the purpose of being an ATC. One of my drug policy colleagues just retired after 25 years and is serving as his mentor.
It's one of the few moves by RR that I admire.
Fun Fact - Barman Jr in his first semester of a two year degree after which it's likely he'll be plugging into the FAA for the purpose of being an ATC. One of my drug policy colleagues just retired after 25 years and is serving as his mentor.
1970 I just graduated college & dad needed me in his photoengraving business which has been like the icebox business for a long time. We were doing fairly well with about 20 employess but 10 were union guys and they went on strike. We had no strike breakers so myself, my brother and father for about 2 weeks tried to do the work of the ten guys after about 2 weeks we gave in to their wage increase demands, and therefore they were making more than I was. Hence my feelings of glee when Reagan really did start to turn the tide. In early 1970 the unions were a huge force.
