Message Board User's Guide, Rules of Engagement, Posting Photos

 
Sign up  |   |   |  Latest Topics
 
 
 


Note: This topic is locked. No new replies will be accepted.


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 3      Prev   1   2   3
TonyCasamento69

Century Club
Registered:
Posts: 1,762
Reply with quote  #31 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny

I don't think it fair for you to disdain someone not engaged ...



Not only is he not engaged, I don't think he's even dating anyone.

But seriously, did you miss his latest post on Reagan's quip about liberals?

__________________
"Everything in moderation, including moderation"
Tony Casamento '69
TonyCasamento69

Century Club
Registered:
Posts: 1,762
Reply with quote  #32 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny

Did you think I meant Julius & Ethel?




No, Lucy and Ethel. 

__________________
"Everything in moderation, including moderation"
Tony Casamento '69
laguna_b

Avatar / Picture

Century Club
Registered:
Posts: 2,912
Reply with quote  #33 
I was an early supporter of Ronald Reagan. Unfortunately RR was a fairly intellectually simple person who was anice guy who did not understand the world or the complexities of governing. He was clearly senile through most of his second term. If you watched the second election debates you would be able to see the actor was taking the wrong cues. Fortunately, a man of greater wisdom, leadership and insight took over in Moscow and realized how futile the arms race was. The purpose was useless and draining the economies of both countries. He made peace, Reagan accepted it. Had he wanted to, he could have done nuclear blackmail. When both sides have over 20 nuclear tipped ICBMs the prospects of war are unthinkable and we both had 1000s. RR, a "conservative" left a legacy of trillions of dollars of new debt, huge munitions that needed to be destroyed at more cost and ignored and NEVER mentioned the AIDS crisis. My votes and support for RR were the result of my stupidity at the time and I truly regret them and him. GWB saved him from being the worst president in American history.

__________________
REAL Patriots Defend The Constitution!
TerrencePTuffyLSA69

Avatar / Picture

SPONSOR & Russell's Pal
Registered:
Posts: 3,704
Reply with quote  #34 
Quote:
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) - The highest courts in two states dealt gay rights advocates dual setbacks Thursday, rejecting same-sex couples' bid to win marriage rights in New York and reinstating a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in Georgia.


Back to the legislature?

__________________
Terrence P. Tuffy

Be steady in your convictions, and be a person of your word.
Book of Sirach 5:10
Ken

Avatar / Picture

SPONSOR
Registered:
Posts: 856
Reply with quote  #35 

laguna_b,

Here is a quote from Ronald Reagan's 1986 State of the Union address:

 

We will continue, as a high priority, the fight against Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). An unprecedented research effort is underway to deal with this major epidemic public health threat. The number of AIDS cases is expected to increase. While there are hopes for drugs and vaccines against AIDS, none is immediately at hand. Consequently, efforts should focus on prevention, to inform and to lower risks of further transmission of the AIDS virus. To this end, I am asking the Surgeon General to prepare a report to the American people on AIDS

 

So, it appears you are wrong; he did not ignore AIDS & did mention it.

 

Ken


__________________
Kenneth J. Berger


Registered:
Posts: N/A
Reply with quote  #36 

Barry,

I have a slightly different take on Mr. Reagan's presidency.

 

I can't make a judgment on Mr. Reagan's intelligence. However, during his presidency I was involved very heavily in strategic military planning, so I did have the opportunity to help execute and see the results of many of his decisions.

 

Mr. Reagan apparently felt the most important thing he could do as president was bring down the Soviet Union. This position may be arguable, but what is not arguable is that he was successful, with the help of Great Britain and John Paul II. He rightly recognized that, since 1945, every strategic decision the Soviet leadership made was in direct response to something we did. Perhaps previous presidents understood this also, but Mr. Reagan decided to do something about it.

 

What he did was to apply so much strategic pressure to the Soviet Union that Soviet leaders recognized they were incapable of keeping up. They also finally recognized that it was very unlikely the US would ever execute a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the Soviet Union, and also that the US was really not interested in starting a war in Germany. At the same time, the US had the capability to hold everything in the Soviet Union at risk, and there was nothing they could do about it. This is why the Soviet leaders had their epiphany.

 

It took me a long time to understand this, and required the perspective of time to analyze exactly what was going on while I was playing my small role. Comparing a potential adversary's capabilities with his intentions is perhaps the hardest thing a military planner or a statesman has to do. Mr. Reagan saw both the Soviet Union's capabilities and their intentions with rare clarity. He articulated US strategy vis-a-vis the Soviet Union as, "We win, they lose."

 

Mr. Reagan may have had a simple outlook on life, but he was not a simple-minded thinker.

laguna_b

Avatar / Picture

Century Club
Registered:
Posts: 2,912
Reply with quote  #37 
Quote:
What he did was to apply so much strategic pressure to the Soviet Union that Soviet leaders recognized they were incapable of keeping up.


When you have 100 nukes you have all you need.......

Most of what you stated I agree with...except for what you concluded from it. The idea that we were in a classical race breaks down when either side has more than 100 nukes. MAD - Mutually Assurred Destruction assumes both sides have the ability to destroy the other AND that both actually CARE. As time went on and between excess military spending and the failure of the communist system, the USSR was relatively impoverished. Inspite of the same EXCESS spending we continued to grow our cities and economies. Carry this forward in time and we had all the targets and ALL the things to LOSE and they had none. This is not a good position to be in using the MAD strategy. Starwars SDI was always a very expensive joke with no hope of ever being useful as a defense so we were heading towards a showdown. They could very well have threatened an intitial strike if we did not provide them with massive aid....and we would have had no choice but to comply or lose everything.The HERO was not RR but a man in Russia whose humanity saw through to a better world for HIS people as well. Mikhail Gobachev(sp?) is my hero and visionary because he said MAD was mad and leading to disaster. They had and HAVE sufficient fire power to devastate us and we them. Sadly, some of that firepower is under the most questionable of  security.
I also agree that what WE did influenced what THEY did. We spent billions developing weapons, they spent millions stealing the secrets. Thanks to all that build up the world is a very dangerous place with nukes that could be stolen and used.
I believe that Gorby would have made the same overtures without the USA nearly bankrupting itself on the hair brained weapons buildup but that admittedly is my speculation. He was the visionary for peace. Without him no president would have seen the Cold War end.


__________________
REAL Patriots Defend The Constitution!
laguna_b

Avatar / Picture

Century Club
Registered:
Posts: 2,912
Reply with quote  #38 
Quote:
So, it appears you are wrong; he did not ignore AIDS & did mention it.


Hmmm...I was about to issue my retraction when I started googling and this is what I found:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=36646
I assume we can trust the University of California  on thier text. I scanned visually and electronically and found no mention of AIDS.
Interestingly I also found this: http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200406101057.asp
Where national Review seems to back you up. While I respect NR I suspect they are playing fast with the facts in that it might have been in an earlier draft or somewhere but it seems NOT to have been in the State of the Union 1986.
Correct if I missed something.....


__________________
REAL Patriots Defend The Constitution!
Ken

Avatar / Picture

SPONSOR
Registered:
Posts: 856
Reply with quote  #39 

laguna_b,

 

I stand corrected.  Reagan did not mention AIDS in his 1986 State of the Union address.  However, he did mention it, two days later, in his

 

Message to the Congress on America's Agenda for the Future on February 6, 1986

 

Either way, he did mention it.  So, I stand by my original statement.  He did not ignore the AIDS crisis & your statement that he did is incorrect.

 

Ken

 


__________________
Kenneth J. Berger
laguna_b

Avatar / Picture

Century Club
Registered:
Posts: 2,912
Reply with quote  #40 
Nice to find a middle ground that we 'all' can agree on...thanks Ken

__________________
REAL Patriots Defend The Constitution!


Registered:
Posts: N/A
Reply with quote  #41 

Barry,

 

We could probably agree on many of the facts, but still be miles apart in the interpretation thereof.

 

If you would like to read a pretty good piece on where we were and where we may be going with nukes, try,

 

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/2005/MR1231.pdf

 

The RAND Corp. is a gold mine of this stuff. RAND is funded mostly by the federal government, so its reports tend to be softballs, and somewhat on the conservative side. But not always.

 

Be forewarned, this document is 152 pages long! Very readable, though.

 

For a more liberal slant, try the Union of Concerned Scientists at

 

http://www.ucsusa.org/

 

Both RAND and the UCS usually get their facts right (at least those of which I have some knowledge). However, it's interesting to see the different conclusions they can draw from the same facts.

 

 

TerrencePTuffyLSA69

Avatar / Picture

SPONSOR & Russell's Pal
Registered:
Posts: 3,704
Reply with quote  #42 
If the Calif. Supreme Court overturns Prop. 8 there won't be any need to go vote anymore. If you don't like the "will of the people" just go to court to get it overturned.
__________________
Terrence P. Tuffy

Be steady in your convictions, and be a person of your word.
Book of Sirach 5:10
TerrencePTuffyLSA69

Avatar / Picture

SPONSOR & Russell's Pal
Registered:
Posts: 3,704
Reply with quote  #43 
11/04/09 The tide of extending marriage rights to same-sex couples -- which has swept across New England in recent months -- has stopped at Maine.
__________________
Terrence P. Tuffy

Be steady in your convictions, and be a person of your word.
Book of Sirach 5:10
TerrencePTuffyLSA69

Avatar / Picture

SPONSOR & Russell's Pal
Registered:
Posts: 3,704
Reply with quote  #44 
New York rejects gay marriage.
__________________
Terrence P. Tuffy

Be steady in your convictions, and be a person of your word.
Book of Sirach 5:10
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:


Create your own forum with Website Toolbox!