- Sep 19, 2009
- Reaction score
- Sydney, Australia
- Political Leaning
Wrong, I disagree, the conditions at the time warranted what he did. Would you have supported Iran
Haha, no, of course not! But that's exactly what Reagan was doing - supporting them! He authorised arms sales to Iran. I take it, then, that you fully support Iran in this instance. Or maybe, you just didn't know what 'Iran-Contra' was.
"Conditions at the time?" Oh, please. You are being hopelessly vague.
The war between Afghanistan and Russia was going on and thus the conditions at that time justified the actions.
"What's more important: a few pissed-off Muslims or the fall of the Soviet empire?" - Z. Brzezinski. I guess we now know the right answer to what was probably meant as a rhetorical question.
I had a friend in Grenada that disagrees with you and was saved by our troops.
There you go again! Letting personal judgements cloud the issues at hand. Let's talk in terms of nation-building and needless foreign interference, instead of basing judgement on the predicament of your friend.
There was no mass reduction in the median income during the Reagan years. My income doubled.
Your income doubled? Wow. You really are doing a great job of validating what I was initially suggesting - that you can't see beyond your personal experience. The median income dropped $20,000 under Reagan. So did GDP growth per capita, by the way.
SDI bankrupted the Soviet Union and helped end the cold war leaving Clinton a peace dividend.[*]
It also caused the collapse of the Soviet Union in a way that continues to leave a bad taste in the mouth of the Russians, whilst also totally ignoring GOrbachev's overtures of peace during this period.
Supporting the Contras was good statemanship
lolno. Do some research, moron.
Yes, it was, wasting money in a world bureaucracy that never solves any problems is always good statesmanship and smart use of taxpayer money
Well, it's never going to solve problems when confronted by an attitude like yours, or his. A self-fulfilling prophecy if there ever was one.
I would gladly take the 1.7 trillion Reagan added to the debt vs. what we have today and what Obama is doing[/LIST]
I'm not even going to bother with this one. :roll: Please, try to stay on topic , and stop distracting from the issue at hand.
Your revision of history and coping things from leftwing websites is what really is staggering and absolutely wrong. I along with millions of Americans benefited from the Reagan Economy. You probably weren't alive or old enough during the Reagan years to even understand what you are talking about.
Reagan understood the American people, something you apparently haven't a clue about. He empowered people, not the govt. He empowered private industry not govt. bureaucrats. He doubled economic growth, federal revenue, and added over 22 million jobs to the economy. He is to this day revered by a large majority in this country much to the chagrin of big govt. liberals.
The Reagan years will be remembered as the years when millions benefitted, but millions more suffered. The rest of what you said here is worthless, subjective and inaccurate drivel. Have a nice day. :2wave: