LyrArc Article Gist
Bret Stephens of NYT shows a lack of knowledge of European history and remains oblivious of the disastrous consequences of Reagan's policies that he lauds. He cites Reagan as saying to his own audience - "My idea of policy towards the Soviet Union is simple, some would say simplistic. It is "We win, you lose." The US did not win through Reagan policies, it began three decades of US involvement in wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Middle East, with Iran, that have wasted trillions of dollars and many lives, a period in which it created space for the emergence of China as a world power with newer infrastructure built in a period in which China could quietly rebuild and modernize while the US frittered away its vital resources to the point that funding was missing for vital infrastructure rebuilding and education was not financed by the government as it had done in the early postwar years. The classic European History book by Cambridge historian Brendan Simms, "Europe- The Struggle for Supremacy 1453 to the Present" shows that every time any country became too powerful, the others regardless of religion, old ties or other affiliation joined together to counterbalance and restore the balance- Britain, France, Russia, Austria-Hungary were never allowed to become too dominant. The idea that the Soviet Union collapsed because of Reagan's policies is incorrect- it would have collapsed a decade later without Reagan as by the 1980's the people running the government and the ordinary people had realized the system was not meeting the aspirations of Russians. By buying into this myth Americans were embroiled in useless wars and in so doing probably destroyed more wealth in a short time than any period in world history- the trillions of dollars of oil wealth transferred not to countries such as China or India that had to pull themselves by the bootstraps but to Arab desert regions that were itself not benefitted because they went to fight wars and destruction. ...
Bret Stephens of NYT shows a lack of knowledge of European history and remains oblivious of the disastrous consequences of Reagan's policies that he lauds. He cites Reagan as saying to his own audience - "My idea of policy towards the Soviet Union is simple, some would say simplistic. It is "We win, you lose." The US did not win through Reagan policies, it began three decades of US involvement in wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Middle East, with Iran, that have wasted trillions of dollars and many lives, a period in which it created space for the emergence of China as a world power with newer infrastructure built in a period in which China could quietly rebuild and modernize while the US frittered away its vital resources to the point that funding was missing for vital infrastructure rebuilding and education was not financed by the government as it had done in the early postwar years. The classic European History book by Cambridge historian Brendan Simms, "Europe- The Struggle for Supremacy 1453 to the Present" shows that every time any country became too powerful, the others regardless of religion, old ties or other affiliation joined together to counterbalance and restore the balance- Britain, France, Russia, Austria-Hungary were never allowed to become too dominant. The idea that the Soviet Union collapsed because of Reagan's policies is incorrect- it would have collapsed a decade later without Reagan as by the 1980's the people running the government and the ordinary people had realized the system was not meeting the aspirations of Russians. By buying into this myth Americans were embroiled in useless wars and in so doing probably destroyed more wealth in a short time than any period in world history- the trillions of dollars of oil wealth transferred not to countries such as China or India that had to pull themselves by the bootstraps but to Arab desert regions that were itself not benefitted because they went to fight wars and destruction. ...
