Did Kennedy and Gorbachev really win the Cold War?

[Lynne Foster]

Some people waste a great deal of time trying to blame the Kennedy assasination on the 'Communists'.

Is our view of the Kennedy assassination colored by political perspective?

[Lynne Foster]

Some people waste a great deal of time trying to blame the Kennedy assasination on the 'Communists'.

Is our view of the Kennedy assassination colored by political perspective?

Is that what this is all about, a political squabble between Kennedy and Nixon proxies and lackies?

Sometimes, I get the impression that this board has very little to do with the Kennedy assassination and very much to do with distorting history, to suit a political agenda.

Anybody else get that feeling?

[Lynne Foster]

So much for a climate of "openess".

[Tim Gratz]

"Did Kennedy and Gorbachev really win the Cold War?"

No, it was Reagan and Gorbachev.

[George Bollschweiler]

"Did Kennedy and Gorbachev really win the Cold War?"

No, it was Reagan and Gorbachev.

I always thought it was a fight between these two

[Tim Gratz]

George won, then!! RR's military build-up caused the stupid Soviets to spend themselves to death.

Khruschev had warned against exactly this scenario before he was deposed by the Soviet hard-liners.

[Lynne Foster]

Russia and China are still close allies, did anybody in fact win the cold war/

[Shanet Clark]

The Cold War set the stage for an intense face off where there was no neutral ground.

National interests and diplomacy were always secondary to the capitalist/communist polarity.

Counter-espionage, counter-intelligence programs flourished.

This led to the Nosenko and Oswald scenarios, where "flipped" double agents,

"orchid men" and "Manchurian Candidates" could be manufactured and constructed.

Rabid anti-communist fascists were empowered as evidenced by OPERATION PAPERCLIP

OPERATION MONGOOSE and OPERATION ASHCAN/DUSTBIN........

With the fall of the Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact and Tito's Yugoslavian empire,

the fat cats behind the Pentagon and the CIA had to develop a new threat to rationalize their

runaway spending, classification secrecy and covert operation moneymakers.

[Mark Knight]

The actual fallout of the Cold War isn't over yet. While folks like Tim Gratz argue that Reagan caused the Soviets to spend themselves into oblivion in the 1980's, current US military spending in Iraq and elsewhere is beginning to have the same effect on the US some 20 years later.

And anyone inside America who cannot see that is obviously not looking.

Of course, it can be argued that, thanks to the Bush tax cuts, the problem is one generated on the "supply-side" of the government revenue picture. But the result, no matter whence its origin, is unmistakable. And so today it seems that Al Quaeda is taking a page from the handbook of Mr. Gratz's hero, Ronald Reagan, and is in the process of doing to the US economy today what Reagan accomplished with the Soviet economy in the 1980's. As the Soviets had insufficient industrial and manufacturing base to sustain the level of military spending required to "keep up," so the crumbling US industrial and manufacturing base will eventually prove to be the US' Achilles heel if the current scenario continues for more than a few short years. The house of cards that is the US economy in 2005 will "come crumblin' down," to use the words of a fellow Hoosier, John Mellencamp, if there is no course correction.

And THAT is why I disagree with Bush's "stay-the-course" mantra. Those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are doomed to....well, you know.

Edited December 2, 2005 by Mark Knight

[John Simkin]

The actual fallout of the Cold War isn't over yet. While folks like Tim Gratz argue that Reagan caused the Soviets to spend themselves into oblivion in the 1980's, current US military spending in Iraq and elsewhere is beginning to have the same effect on the US some 20 years later.

And anyone inside America who cannot see that is obviously not looking.

Of course, it can be argued that, thanks to the Bush tax cuts, the problem is one generated on the "supply-side" of the government revenue picture. But the result, no matter whence its origin, is unmistakable. And so today it seems that Al Quaeda is taking a page from the handbook of Mr. Gratz's hero, Ronald Reagan, and is in the process of doing to the US economy today what Reagan accomplished with the Soviet economy in the 1980's. As the Soviets had insufficient industrial and manufacturing base to sustain the level of military spending required to "keep up," so the crumbling US industrial and manufacturing base will eventually prove to be the US' Achilles heel if the current scenario continues for more than a few short years. The house of cards that is the US economy in 2005 will "come crumblin' down," to use the words of a fellow Hoosier, John Mellencamp, if there is no course correction.

And THAT is why I disagree with Bush's "stay-the-course" mantra. Those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are doomed to....well, you know.

A very perceptive post.

Of course the Soviet Union might have been destroyed but there is still China. Everyone seems to have forgotten that China is still a communist state. Therefore, the Cold War is not over. As the US spends itself silly in order to defeat Muslim terrorists, China continues to build its economy. It is gradually taking the US markets and will eventually be the number one economic power in the world. China, not the US, will be the final winners of the Cold War.

[Mark Knight]

You are correct, John. China is taking over the position as the number one manufacturing nation in the world; simply by increasing its purchasing of raw materials such as oil and steel, China can wreak "economic terrorism" on any industrialized nation in the world. And what about the "less-industrialized" nations? I read an article just this week which stated that China is the leading seller of chile peppers [dried] in Mexico; China can grow them, harvest them, process them, ship them and sell them cheaper in Mexico than Mexico can its own peppers. Economically, all China has to do is but twitch its economic muscle, and the shock waves are felt worldwide.

Meanwhile, China is quietly investing in US debt. As long as China continues to buy, the house of cards that is the US economy stands. Should China decide to stop investing, the US economy will screech to a halt. Or worse, should China foreclose on the US' debt to them, they will own us...lock, stock and barrel.

It's time the US leaders got their collective heads out of the sand. China holds the power to take over the US without firing a single shot...and if Washington doesn't realize this, they are more myopic than I've given them credit for. To quote a '60's comedian, "Ray Charles coulda seen that coming!"

Edited December 2, 2005 by Mark Knight

[Guest Stephen Turner]

You are correct, John. China is taking over the position as the number one manufacturing nation in the world; simply by increasing its purchasing of raw materials such as oil and steel, China can wreak "economic terrorism" on any industrialized nation in the world. And what about the "less-industrialized" nations? I read an article just this week which stated that China is the leading seller of chile peppers [dried] in Mexico; China can grow them, harvest them, process them, ship them and sell them cheaper in Mexico than Mexico can its own peppers. Economically, all China has to do is but twitch its economic muscle, and the shock waves are felt worldwide.

Meanwhile, China is quietly investing in US debt. As long as China continues to buy, the house of cards that is the US economy stands. Should China decide to stop investing, the US economy will screech to a halt. Or worse, should China foreclose on the US' debt to them, they will own us...lock, stock and barrel.

It's time the US leaders got their collective heads out of the sand. China holds the power to take over the US without firing a single shot...and if Washington doesn't realize this, they are more myopic than I've given them credit for. To qoute a '60's comedian, "Ray Charles coulda seen that coming!"

Spot on Mr Knight, spot on. And I suspect there's not one danm thing anyone can do about it. What goes around etc etc.

[Gerry Hemming]

The actual fallout of the Cold War isn't over yet. While folks like Tim Gratz argue that Reagan caused the Soviets to spend themselves into oblivion in the 1980's, current US military spending in Iraq and elsewhere is beginning to have the same effect on the US some 20 years later.

And anyone inside America who cannot see that is obviously not looking.

Of course, it can be argued that, thanks to the Bush tax cuts, the problem is one generated on the "supply-side" of the government revenue picture. But the result, no matter whence its origin, is unmistakable. And so today it seems that Al Quaeda is taking a page from the handbook of Mr. Gratz's hero, Ronald Reagan, and is in the process of doing to the US economy today what Reagan accomplished with the Soviet economy in the 1980's. As the Soviets had insufficient industrial and manufacturing base to sustain the level of military spending required to "keep up," so the crumbling US industrial and manufacturing base will eventually prove to be the US' Achilles heel if the current scenario continues for more than a few short years. The house of cards that is the US economy in 2005 will "come crumblin' down," to use the words of a fellow Hoosier, John Mellencamp, if there is no course correction.

And THAT is why I disagree with Bush's "stay-the-course" mantra. Those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are doomed to....well, you know.

A very perceptive post.

Of course the Soviet Union might have been destroyed but there is still China. Everyone seems to have forgotten that China is still a communist state. Therefore, the Cold War is not over. As the US spends itself silly in order to defeat Muslim terrorists, China continues to build its economy. It is gradually taking the US markets and will eventually be the number one economic power in the world. China, not the US, will be the final winners of the Cold War.

-----------------------------

Permit me to enlarge upon the foregoing. China (mostly via the PLA - "Peoples Lib/Army" proprietaries) now hold more than 50% of the outstanding U.S. Treasury Bills. As I recall (and the PLA certainly does), any minor glitch in the U.S. GDP sends tremors throughout ALL of the "industrialized (and emerging) nations on this Planet. Japan failed to grasp this "matter-of-consequence" some 10+ years ago, and are now barely coming out of a "depression" today !!

While a few "Taiwan-ophones" ranted in the aftermath of one obscure PLA (retired) General, whom threatened "Armegeddon"; they missied out on the news that: The PLA has warned the 70+% muslims in Xhian Zie Province to refrain from "copy-catting" the al-Qa'ida terror campaigns in their quest for a world-wide "Caliphate".

These series of warnings, to those few radicals of the northwest China Province, also hinted that should something untoward eminate therefrom: The retaliatory response would exceed the toll of the "Holocaust"; and be quite similar in execution!!

Moreover, and via the nascent China, Khazakstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyz, et al. politico/military alliance "grapevine"; the message was sent out that: Should "Islama-Kaze Jihadists" carry out even one more "shaheed" operation inside the U.S. [or otherwise degrade the US/World economies] -- that "Nuking" of Mecca, Medina, Qom, and other holy sites "would-be-on-the-table"!!

Therefore, I would give 90% of the credit for a non-repeat of "9/11" to the PLA messages, and NONE to "Shrub's cronies" or the failing D.H.S. They know full well that if WE go down, THEY go down !! These "ChiComs" are some of the sharpest folks in the World !!

Even my favorite "Paratrooper" President is up to speed on these matters. As everybody now realizes, Venezuela owns 100% of the CITGO gas and oil operations inside the U.S. (18% market-share). And he recently announced that: He will issue CITGO "discount/debit cards" to ALL folks registered as being below the poverty level. More interestingly, Hugo Chavez has already invested $100 million+ in Brazil, and this for a massive expansion of that nation's 90% Ethanol fuel operations.

Chavez fully intends to re-invent (and direct) a genuine "Alliance For Progress"; and thereby picking up where JFK left off !!

Chairs,

GPH

__________________________________

[Mark Knight]

I realized that China owned more than a third of outstanding T-Bills, but I wasn't sure that the figure was now "more than half."

[Lynne Foster]

The actual fallout of the Cold War isn't over yet. While folks like Tim Gratz argue that Reagan caused the Soviets to spend themselves into oblivion in the 1980's, current US military spending in Iraq and elsewhere is beginning to have the same effect on the US some 20 years later.

And anyone inside America who cannot see that is obviously not looking.

Of course, it can be argued that, thanks to the Bush tax cuts, the problem is one generated on the "supply-side" of the government revenue picture. But the result, no matter whence its origin, is unmistakable. And so today it seems that Al Quaeda is taking a page from the handbook of Mr. Gratz's hero, Ronald Reagan, and is in the process of doing to the US economy today what Reagan accomplished with the Soviet economy in the 1980's. As the Soviets had insufficient industrial and manufacturing base to sustain the level of military spending required to "keep up," so the crumbling US industrial and manufacturing base will eventually prove to be the US' Achilles heel if the current scenario continues for more than a few short years. The house of cards that is the US economy in 2005 will "come crumblin' down," to use the words of a fellow Hoosier, John Mellencamp, if there is no course correction.

And THAT is why I disagree with Bush's "stay-the-course" mantra. Those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are doomed to....well, you know.

Last time the US was on that mantra, Japan's economy took over.

Like John said, if the US does not wake up fast...China will win the Cold war that is supposedly over -like the Iraq war.

I think that's the probalem. It's very easy to start a war but...try winning the peace.