It doesn't make a bit of sense when just because you have an opinion different from those of your neighbors your vote doesn't count. This is going to deeply divide the nation as it becomes more and more fragmented.

Good acting can go along way, and the left is still trying to act their way out of the truth. A crumbling economy, that no one new existed or believed was occurring until after the fall had already occurred. Quit rewriting history, there was no doubt about the strength of the USSR prior to its fall. Reagan announced to the world that the socialist system of the USSR was a failure, but hell, who any educated status would believe that, they still preach socialism works. And you are right, the econmy crumbled, why, the arms race.

And yes, we had enough nuclear weapons to blow the world up 5 times over, but we didn't now did we. The same gloom and doom that was being cried back then, it was wrong then, and history has proven it wrong now. And how quick that we forget, that it was Reagan that got Gorbachev back to the tables and eliminated an entire class of nuclear weapons.

Had we listened to the appeasers then, and not challenged USSR supremacy, perhaps the USSR would still be around, at least then the professors would have an example to give when they try and say socialism works. But unfortunately, Reagan did what no other American President ever did, he stood up to the USSR.

Time and time again, I have had to listen to all these naysayers about the Cold War and how it ended. No one was saying a thing about the Soviet economy before its collapse, but now that it has collapsed everyone wants the world to know that is why the Soviet Union fell. Go back and look at the history, from 1980 until 1988, no one, NO ONE, was saying a thing about the collapse of the USSR except for Ronald Reagan.

So your contention about acting must be seriously flawed. Because if it was all scripted for him, where did he get his idea about the collapse. Go back and read his writings from the 1960's and 1970's, writings in his own hand written on yellow paper. Reagan knew long before the rest of the world, and maintained that belief throughout his presidency. When the media, the academics all said he was wrong he stayed the course, and the wall fell, and the Soviet Union right after. Try to rewrite it all you want, but the facts do not support your version of your so-called truth.

dmk

Until the USSR was shown to be weak, until President Reagan called it an "evil empire", no Western leader had ever challenged the strength of the USSR. Until President Reagan, all other presidents tried to maintain a status quo with the USSR.

Meanwhile, inside the USSR, dissidents were sentenced to prison in the gulags, or moved to the wilderness in the Ukraine, if they were not killed outright. The people feared the KGB, they feared being pulled from their beds in the middle of the night, they feared being imprisoned, and they feared death. As long as the Kremlin controlled the military, and the weapons, the people were not going to revolt. They all remember what occured in Hungary in 1956, when the people stood up to the communist, the dissenters were run down in the streets with tanks.

No, it was the eminent collapse of their economy, and their failure to stand up to the US that ultimately caused the failure of the USSR. The rewriting won't work. I lived through it all, from the fear of nuclear war that the media spread, to the shock and disbelief of the media when the wall did collapse. No one expected it, nor did they predict it, only Ronald Reagan. The world all laughed at him, and now, to add insult to injury, they try to deny the simple truth.

dmk

I didn't. I just said they were already headed for political and social failure.

But who knew, other than Reagan. The learnered few believed that the Soviet Union was as strong as ever. The media thought that by standing up to the Soviet Union, the United States would face disaster, and the world a nuclear war. But in the end the only one that faced disaster was the Soviet Union, while the world stood by in shock and disbelief.

Your statement is just more hindsight. Look at the history in its perspective of the time it was occurring. At the time, it was only Reagan and his vision that challenged the status quo. And because of his vision, his beliefs, and his willingness to carry his policies to their conclusion, the Soviet Union found itself nonexistent and another sad chapter of history.

dmk

I'm not surprised the media thought that if the U.S. stood up to the Soviets, the world was going to go to nuclear war. I have no doubts about that. The media in the 1980s, just like the media now, had a product to sell. Don't ever forget that. You say that it was only Reagan vs. everyone else. That seems like the perception to me. From what you're saying, it sounds more like it was Reagan vs. the media, which is fine. Trying to give one man credit like this is just ridiculous, however. As you are obviously a big Reagan fan, I can see why you are giving him so much praise. I just think it is highly unlikely that he was the only person in the entire world that believe the U.S. could win the Cold War. When you look at history over long enough time periods, you will notice trends. Reagan or not, the Soviet Union would have eventually failed, maybe not when it did, but it would have.

Of course it was not one man who caused the Soviet Union to fall. But it was the great help and wisdom of this one man who had a vision that we can fight back. What if we had a President like Clinton in office during those years who would have probably ignored the Soviets, and decrease military spending dramatically?? I don't even want to think about it!

The Soviets were heavily bankrupt because they were trying to compete against us in the arms race thanks to Reagan. Sure the "Star Wars" program is funny to a lot of people, but I think the Soviets took it seriously and just felt that they didn't have the funds to compete with such a serious program.

Reagan does deserve credit because that was his first priority during his time in office. His first priority and the fall of the Soviet Union is a great accomplishment.

If Reagan was around these days, do you think he would agree with Bush's war? That is a great thing we should debate on.

Well one can certainly speculate what Reagan would have thought about this war when you look at who has been on the rise upwards since 2002.

I wasn't trying to take away any and all credit from Reagan. The man definitely deserves credit. But such a significant historical event such as the downfall of a powerful and large empire such as the Soviet Union was can never be attributed to the actions or "vision" of one man. There are always too many factors considered. Reagan has the benefit of being the man in power when the Soviets fell and he certainly made standing up to the Soviets a major priority. But trying to glorify him with wonderful rhetoric about his vision and strength is unfair to the other people and forces at work that fought for decades to bring down the Soviet Union.

I will grant you that.

It pinches my nerve when people say stuff like Reagan had nothing to do with the fall of the Soviet Union. I can see where you are coming from though...I assume we are on an agreement that Reagan was a big help, but others do deserve much credit as well.

Yeah, like I said he definitely deserves credit. But trying to attribute the whole downfall to him or trying to qualify statements like "The Soviet Union would never have failed if it wasn't for Ronald Reagan" is unfair.