[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Gank


Great men tend to achieve great things, like Ghandi or Mandela, Reagan just made rich people richer, poor people poorer, started arms races and bombed countrys for no good reason.

The ideal American president, then?

[Grey Wolf]

I never really saw the signifigance of Reagan's presidency (Gorbachev played a far larger role in the actual end of the Cold War), but still, it isn't right to make fun of the dead, aldo.

[Omniscaper]

Reagan, I was too young to appreciate what you did at the time you were in office..... dang Nintendo. Thanks for leading the US into OUTSTARING the Soviet Union and fixing the economy from Carter's mess.

NOW GIVE THOSE TERRORISTS IN THE AFTERLIFE HELL!!!!!

[Grey Wolf]

You realize we were ahead of the Soviets in the arms race basically the entire time, right? At least from the 1960s. The only reason the numbers even seemd competitive was because the USSR was exagerating their numbers for propaganda purposes.

Realistically, that means that Reagan's arms race can be viewed as two things:
1. Provoking an enemy for no real reason.
2. Causing a massive debt, once again for no real reason.

[Omniscaper]

I don't know about you, but if these were the old days, I wouldn't want to live in a kingdom or a civilization that did not have the means to defend its citizens. Either it be a wall or a grand army.

Do not EASILY forget the Cuban missile crisis. The Soviet Union was a real threat at the time. The lack of communication and intelligence assumptions kept that threat real.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
I never really saw the signifigance of Reagan's presidency (Gorbachev played a far larger role in the actual end of the Cold War), but still, it isn't right to make fun of the dead, aldo.

I wasn't aware I was making fun of anyone - 'twas a satirical comment.

However, why should we regard the dead differently from the living?  One of the most annoying things about the world is that some people seem to become uncriticisable after they die..... i.e. Princess Diana (pre death - publicity seeking media whore, post death - 'people's princess).

[Grey Wolf]

Remember, those were MRBMs and IRBMs.  Part of the reason that Russia was willing to move those to Cuba is that they were basically useless to the Russians as their range was too short.

In ICBMs, the Russians were behind, and we knew it from about 1962 onward. They had a fraction of the missiles that they claimed to have.

Also, the Star Wars program would have put us more at risk than we were earlier. By building it, we would have been force to pull out of the ABM Treaty, as we did early in Bush's presidency. And as the tech isn't really that effective yet, let alone then, it was not an intelligent idea.

Aldo: I'm not saying that we should glorify people after their death. It's just that it doesn't seem fair to criticize someone who can't fight back.  Since they are dead, let the discussion about them die with them.

[Gank]

Originally posted by Omniscaper
Do not EASILY forget the Cuban missile crisis. The Soviet Union was a real threat at the time. The lack of communication and intelligence assumptions kept that threat real.

The Soviet Union was never a real threat.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by aldo_14


I wasn't aware I was making fun of anyone - 'twas a satirical comment.

However, why should we regard the dead differently from the living?  One of the most annoying things about the world is that some people seem to become uncriticisable after they die..... i.e. Princess Diana (pre death - publicity seeking media whore, post death - 'people's princess).

"I was so naive that I thought the point of any eulogy was to tell the truth about the subject!...But it now looks as though this isn't the way to deliver a proper eulogy at all..."

-Socrates, from one of Plato's books.-

[Omniscaper]

Aldo_14, I don't think dead people become uncriticisable, there's proper a time and place for it. I believe its is inappropriate and TACTLESS to launch an attack on a person who passed on so recently.

SUppose a CLOSE relative or LOVED one of yours passed away and in the funeral a person starts criticizing and bashing the individual, would you be up in arms at the dude for disrespecting?

People are in pain at this point. Only inconsiderate $$$holes would be so cruel as to not be sensitive to the families. So anyone who has something TACTLESS to say, say it else where. Its obvious that this thread was made for final respects. Make another thread titled


"I don't like Reagan and don't I don't care who I hurt while expressing it"


I'm actually surprised that so many TV networks are airing the Reagan Tribute right now, considering how biased many of them are because of the upcoming elections.

To whover was sponsoring that tasteless anti-Reagan mini-propaganda-series about Reagan and the network that even CONSIDERED airing it WHILE HE WAS STILL ALIVE,

::cough:: CBS ::coucg::

YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO AIR TONIGHT's MEMORIAL!!!!

Now the network execs want to be friends to the friends and loveones of the deceased? I THINK NOT. Ratings are so fun aren't they?

Gank, perhaps you are right, but the FEAR was real enough for people to act. Perhaps if the US and USSR stopped posturing at the time both sides would have realized that the fear is not necessary.

[Rictor]

Omni: kind of hard to keep your tongue when at any other time you would let loose and put those who pervert history to their cause in their proper place. But I try. Give it a few months, and maybe we can have a proper discussion.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Omniscaper
Aldo_14, I don't think dead people become uncriticisable, there's proper a time and place for it. I believe its is inappropriate and TACTLESS to launch an attack on a person who passed on so recently.

SUppose a CLOSE relative or LOVED one of yours passed away and in the funeral a person starts criticizing and bashing the individual, would you be up in arms at the dude for disrespecting?

People are in pain at this point. Only inconsiderate $$$holes would be so cruel as to not be sensitive to the families. So anyone who has something TACTLESS to say, say it else where. Its obvious that this thread was made for final respects. Make another thread titled


"I don't like Reagan and don't I don't care who I hurt while expressing it"


I'm actually surprised that so many TV networks are airing the Reagan Tribute right now, considering how biased many of them are because of the upcoming elections.

To whover was sponsoring that tasteless anti-Reagan mini-propaganda-series about Reagan and the network that even CONSIDERED airing it WHILE HE WAS STILL ALIVE,

::cough:: CBS ::coucg::

YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO AIR TONIGHT's MEMORIAL!!!!

Now the network execs want to be friends to the friends and loveones of the deceased? I THINK NOT. Ratings are so fun aren't they?

Like I said, I didn't make any attack.  Re-read my first post.

NB: Propaganda is often in the eye of the beholder.

[Omniscaper]

Aldo, I wasn't accusing you of attacking. Just responding to your previous post about dead people being uncriticizable.

Richtor, huh?


My relatives were just telling me how much the media attacked Reagan for his idealism much like the way Bush is today. Is there anyone old enough to confirm this?

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Omniscaper
Aldo, I wasn't accusing you of attacking. Just responding to your previous post about dead people being uncriticizable.

k.  To be clear, I'm not arguing against sympathy, etc, during initial mourning process - just in perpituity.

 i.e. that everyone's (public personas) life needs to be subject to review, criticism, etc posthumously* for the purposes of history.   If that means criticism, then so be it.

*tactfully

[Liberator]

It's called being respectful people.  There is a time and a place for criticism, a funeral is not it.

You don't speak ill of the dead until they are buried.  You show compassion to the family.  And above all else, you remember the good and forget the bad.

Reagan was the finest man in the last 40 years to occupy the Office.  The world is a lesser place with his absence.

Remind me to make an inappropriate comment the next time solemnity is the rule.

A Great Man has died, show him the respect he's due, POLITICS BE DAMNED.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Liberator
It's called being respectful people.  There is a time and a place for criticism, a funeral is not it.

You don't speak ill of the dead until they are buried.  You show compassion to the family.  And above all else, you remember the good and forget the bad.

Reagan was the finest man* in the last 40 years to occupy the Office.  The world is a lesser place with his absence.

Remind me to make an inappropriate comment the next time solemnity is the rule.

A Great Man has died, show him the respect he's due, POLITICS BE DAMNED.

*Contras.

[Petrarch of the VBB]

Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
It's just that it doesn't seem fair to criticize someone who can't fight back.

By that token you shouldn't criticise anyone who isn't with you at the time, or otherwise aware of what you're doing.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Petrarch of the VBB


By that token you shouldn't criticise anyone who isn't with you at the time, or otherwise aware of what you're doing.

which is usually the best time

[Petrarch of the VBB]

Exactly

[SadisticSid]

Thatcher, Raegan and Gorbachev were the most influential peacetime premiers of the 20th century. The trio brought about the end of the Cold War and of course the collapse of the Soviet Union. I have far more praise for Raegan than any of his republican successors and he was truly one of the more generally likeable US presidents as well. RIP.