On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 01:50:55 -0500, thunder
wrote:

I give Gorbachev quite a bit of credit, but it could be they both needed
each other to succeed.

http://www.slate.com/id/2102081/

I really would like to say ok, they would have needed each other.
But why this rather pathetic claim as a Reagan-victory. The title of
this article you mention "How Reagan won the cold war" is just a
(another) example of swollen rhetorics overestimating ones own
importance.

In Europe, as far as I can overlook, sentiments are as I described.
Gorbatsjov was a unique, intelligent USSR-leader with vision. The
barking from the side made not much difference. This barking had been
going on for ages, so why did it result precisely at that moment ?
Correct, cause Gorbatsjov entered the building.

I don't know why it is necessary to claim this historical event as a
Reagan-victory without ANY attention to fi recent developments in the
satellite-states, without attention to the immense internal
production-problems, without any attention to the distinction between
process and event. I do have some clue in mind though.

Please bare with me for just another second of your lifetime.
What would become of the world if the dominant american style would
become less bombastic selfboasting and more diplomatic.
I think it would prevent the ongoing war from expanding further.

But you as republicans have enough problems on your hands....
All I want to add is don't be surprised if your attitude keeps
"friends" and "allies" from giving you the aid you automatically think
you're entitled to.

Regards, Len.

In article ,
says...


And yet, when the fecal matter hits the rotating cooling device, who
does the world look to? Where do immigrants want to immigrate to?

New Zealand?

jps

In article , says...
Jim Carter wrote:

All of these places have seen the "Ugly American" close up.

We've also seen a few ugly un-Americans posting to this NG close up.

Quick, mirror Snippy.

jps

In article , says...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Bert Robbins" wrote:

Len, I do not think that a lot of the Americans on this newsgroup can
comprehend what an "Ugly American" really is. Why don't you paint a
picture for us of an "Ugly American."

You are a stupid little man.

And you are such a class act, Kanter.

And where might that leave you?

Oh yeah, in Derby.

jps

Len wrote:

I differ with your statement: "Whatever president of the US, Eastern Europe
would have changed like it did."

My sources are the news, opinions and comments by america-
watchers (of various bloodtypes).

In terms of who deserves the most credit it is unmistakenly
Gorbatsjov. Why is it there is such a need to blow up the part Reagan
played?

"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"

The beginning of the end of the Cold War

On June 12, 1987, President Ronald Reagan spoke the people of West
Berlin at the base of the Brandenburg Gate, near the Berlin wall. Due to
the amplification system being used, the President's words could also be
heard on the Eastern (Communist-controlled) side of the wall. The
address Reagan delivered that day is considered by many to have affirmed
the beginning of the end of the Cold War and the fall of communism. On
Nov. 9-11, 1989, the people of a free Berlin tore down that wall.

Of all his speeches, Ronald Reagan's "tear down that wall," address may
well become the "Great Communicator's" best remembered. The following is
an excerpt from President Reagan's address.

"In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: 'We will bury you.' But in the West
today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and
well-being unprecedented in all human history.

In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness,
declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too
little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself.
After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one
great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom
replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace.
Freedom is the victor.

"And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to
understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a
new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been
released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed.
Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater
freedom from state control.

"Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or
are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or
to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change
and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that
the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world
peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be
unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and
peace.

"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,
tear down this wall!'"

--
Skipper

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 03:39:48 -0600, Skipper wrote:

Len wrote:

I differ with your statement: "Whatever president of the US, Eastern Europe
would have changed like it did."

My sources are the news, opinions and comments by america-
watchers (of various bloodtypes).

In terms of who deserves the most credit it is unmistakenly
Gorbatsjov. Why is it there is such a need to blow up the part Reagan
played?

"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"

snipping the part where the communication
The beginning of the end of the Cold War

On June 12, 1987, President Ronald Reagan spoke the people of West
Berlin at the base of the Brandenburg Gate, near the Berlin wall. Due to
the amplification system being used, the President's words could also be
heard on the Eastern (Communist-controlled) side of the wall. The
address Reagan delivered that day is considered by many to have affirmed
the beginning of the end of the Cold War and the fall of communism. On
Nov. 9-11, 1989, the people of a free Berlin tore down that wall.

Of all his speeches, Ronald Reagan's "tear down that wall," address may
well become the "Great Communicator's" best remembered. The following is
an excerpt from President Reagan's address.

"In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: 'We will bury you.' But in the West
today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and
well-being unprecedented in all human history.

In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness,
declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too
little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself.
After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one
great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom
replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace.
Freedom is the victor.

"And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to
understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a
new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been
released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed.
Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater
freedom from state control.

"Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or
are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or
to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change
and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that
the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world
peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be
unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and
peace.

"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,
tear down this wall!'"

Hi Skipper

I don't argue here about the literal quality of the speech writers of
mr. Reagan. My point is there was a mr Gorbatsjov to address this
speech to. His presence in the Kremlin was a necessary and in my view
sufficient condition for the cold war to end. And that doesn't apply
to that speech you refer to or do you really think otherwise?

Thunder,
Reading your other postings I came to the conclusion I have
mistakingly addressed you as a republican american. I'm sorry about
any offence you may have felt.

Len wrote:

I don't argue here about the literal quality of the speech writers of
mr. Reagan. My point is there was a mr Gorbatsjov to address this
speech to.

Occasionally, a good navigator needs to step back and assess his overall
position. This might be a good time for you to undertake such an action.
You might ask yourself if you'd be better off if there never was an
America to rescue Europe from the depths not so long ago.

--
Skipper

"Len" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:46:10 -0500, "Jeff Rigby"
wrote:

The true reason is they couldn't outspend us! We were ever advancing our
military and delivery systems. Imagine if you will the soviet military
mind
when he learns that US attack subs have been consistently inside soviet
protected waters for 10 years and most of the soviet subs have been
shadowed
undetected for much of that time. Regan began a policy of informing the
Russians of these facts by allowing the soviet subs to detect our subs as
we
come up behind then by our pinging them (One ping is like a radar lock for
aircraft). This gave away a tactical advantage but put pressure on the
government.

Along with pressure on the military Regan put the world press to use. IF
you grew up in Poland you probably couldn't hear many of his speeches. He
simply pointed out that the Soviet economic system didn't work, that
educated people were trying to leave Russia while our country had to
patrol
it's borders to keep people out.

I differ with your statement: "Whatever president of the US, Eastern
Europe
would have changed like it did." I think it would have taken another 10
years and would have been very brutal with many internal fights and
quashing
of rebellions. Regan policies and speeches created enough support for
Gornatsjov (sp) that he could turn internal Russian politics on a
different
course instead of the self destructive one it was on.

I'd be interested in where you get your news and the books that were used
in
your education system. We have many here in this country that have a
similar view of world events and I'd like to pin down the sources of this.

Jeff,

My sources are the news, opinion-papers and comments by america-
watchers (of various bloodtypes).

The your sources are all biased opinion. Each news organization has a bias.
Each person writing an op-ed peice for a newspaper has a bias. Each
individual oberserving an event has a bias.

In terms of who deserves the most credit it is unmistakenly
Gorbatsjov. Why is it there is such a need to blow up the part Reagan
played? Don't you think any president with a smart advisor would have
done not exactly the same but would have added in the same amount?

No, Reagan was the drivinig force in tearing down the iron curtain.

Let me put it in another way: What would have become of this alleged
"Reagan-directed-end-of-the-cold-war" if Gorbatsjow hadn't been there
but another Brenzjnev-type or Chroestjow-type?

A few more years and a few hundred thousand people behind the iron curtain
would be dead.

As another poster here said, Reagan was in the car, he wasn't the
driver but he was in the car. I admit to that. But any us president
would have been in that car.

The winners write the history and the loosers complain about it. In the
future it will be read that Reagan won the cold war throught the economic
might of the USA and the democratic principles that it promoted. Fair or
unfair this is what history will see.

"Len" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 03:39:48 -0600, Skipper wrote:

Len wrote:

I differ with your statement: "Whatever president of the US, Eastern
Europe
would have changed like it did."

My sources are the news, opinions and comments by america-
watchers (of various bloodtypes).

In terms of who deserves the most credit it is unmistakenly
Gorbatsjov. Why is it there is such a need to blow up the part Reagan
played?

"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"

snipping the part where the communication
The beginning of the end of the Cold War

On June 12, 1987, President Ronald Reagan spoke the people of West
Berlin at the base of the Brandenburg Gate, near the Berlin wall. Due to
the amplification system being used, the President's words could also be
heard on the Eastern (Communist-controlled) side of the wall. The
address Reagan delivered that day is considered by many to have affirmed
the beginning of the end of the Cold War and the fall of communism. On
Nov. 9-11, 1989, the people of a free Berlin tore down that wall.

Of all his speeches, Ronald Reagan's "tear down that wall," address may
well become the "Great Communicator's" best remembered. The following is
an excerpt from President Reagan's address.

"In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: 'We will bury you.' But in the West
today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and
well-being unprecedented in all human history.

In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness,
declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too
little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself.
After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one
great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom
replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace.
Freedom is the victor.

"And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to
understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a
new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been
released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed.
Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater
freedom from state control.

"Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or
are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or
to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change
and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that
the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world
peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be
unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and
peace.

"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,
tear down this wall!'"

Hi Skipper

I don't argue here about the literal quality of the speech writers of
mr. Reagan. My point is there was a mr Gorbatsjov to address this
speech to. His presence in the Kremlin was a necessary and in my view
sufficient condition for the cold war to end. And that doesn't apply
to that speech you refer to or do you really think otherwise?

Reagan's speech writers tried to get "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"
out of the speech and everytime Reagan proof read the speech he put the
sentence back in.

Thunder,
Reading your other postings I came to the conclusion I have
mistakingly addressed you as a republican american. I'm sorry about
any offence you may have felt.

We are all Americans, some of us lean left and other lean right but make no
mistake we are all Americans first.

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...


And yet, when the fecal matter hits the rotating cooling device, who
does the world look to? Where do immigrants want to immigrate to?

New Zealand?

And how may get in each year?