Easy and good trade war must be working out -- Good job, guys!


Trading with the Soviets in 80’s is what brought them down?

The complete lack of education among the Left would be hilarious if they weren’t running all of our bureaucracies based on their fairytales.

The arms race broke the Soviets, they could not feed their people and spend enough to keep up with the United States.

Which is exactly what Reagan said would happen and the extreme Left predicted doomsday results if he tried it just like the Left is predicting doomsday for Trumps strategy now.

And as always, when the dust settles the Left will be proved to be on the wrong side of history… And as always they will then try to revise history to make themselves look like relevant players instead of flat earth buffoons.


That is truly hilarious, if I was a mod I would sticky this post to keep it at the top of the thread so we could compare it to reality in a couple years.


SDI was a blow to the Soviet leadership, but how does it effect the mindset of the average Soviet Citizen?

How does it make people in Warsaw pact countries kick off the velvet revolution?

How does it make Gorbachev put Glasnost and Perestroika into place?

Answer: it doesn’t.

What did was trade. Trade is communication, and it meant the leadership could no longer lie to their people what life in the West was like.

People were buying blue jeans, listening to Billy Joel, and eating our food.

And this is what turned the tables, from the bottom up.


That should be unbelievable but I have seen you double down on ridiculous statements so often that I expect it now.


The “average Soviet citizen” didn’t bring down the Soviet Union. Quite a number of them today are pining for the “good old days” when Uncle Joe made all their decisions for them.


Gorbachev gave out a poll asking “Should we get rid of “the backyard empire”?”

The people said yes.

The Soviet Union had an image problem brought about by comparisons to the West; one that Gorbachev was trying hard to correct.

He unraveled what sustained it in the process.

Look at Perestroika Dave, look at what it did. It created private business owners. It gave local governments autonomy, It put a McDonalds in Pushkin Square. All while this was still the Soviet Union.


And guess who the vast majority of those so-called “private business owners” were. Former leaders of the communist party or the heads of the various criminal organizations within the USSR who’d been paying off the communists to leave them alone.


I’m not denying corruption or poor execution. I’m saying the image problem forced them to change things.

Giving local governments autonomy later ushered in Kleptocratic oligarchies in places like Romania and the Ukraine; but that’s still better than being apart of the Soviet Union.


Answer: It did too. The Soviets bankrupted themselves trying to rival our military capability, and they had little economic choice. I suppose they could have tried double down on what they were doing like North Korea, but their military was already a demoralized mess even in the '70s (read MiG Pilot by John Barron), and you can’t maintain order against a rioting starving people if your own military’s sympathies aren’t with you because they’re hungry, too. In the U.S. Air Force Museum sits a MiG-23 that was sold by a high-ranking Soviet officer out of his own regiment to feed his men; that’s the state they were in.

The fact that it was still the Soviet Union at the time means nothing. They already saw the handwriting on the wall, and knew that nothing but disaster awaited them if they doubled down on stupid.


Been awhile guys, sorry. Hope you still remember me,

Anyways, I’ve been a big proponents of Trumps trade policies, in particular dealing with China. Yes, indeed, even going against Canada and our excessive tariff policies.

If Western liberty is to thrive, it needs to be via the success of the U.S and capitalism. Global socialism is destroying economic opportunity (replaces with nepotism and subsidies), and, civil liberties.


They initiated Perestroika before Reagan initiated SDI. And Peterstroika is credited with giving the Warsaw countries the autonomy they needed to kickstart their revolt.

The USSR military was against Perestroika and Glasnost. They understood what it would usher in.


First I’ve heard of it, and I was paying attention to the international news in those days. I never heard of either until the '90s, or late '80s at the earliest. And the Soviets were already against the economic wall by then; it’s reflected in Gorbachev agreeing to remove IRBMs from the western USSR in exchange for Reagan not deploying more. When their economy was still (relatively) sound, they never would have considered such a thing. In fact, they started out the decade looking to upgrade and supplement their IRBMs with the then-new SS-20 design.


Gorbachev wasn’t even the one to put into place, that was Brezhnev. In 1979.


Interesting that I saw no evidence of it in the news. I wonder what the catch is (this time).


Market Summary > Dow Jones Industrial Average
26,938.26 +78.06 (0.29%)
Jul 11, 9:31 AM EDT

Market Summary > Nasdaq Composite
8,213.60 +11.07 (0.13%)
Jul 11, 9:32 AM EDT

1 United States Dollar equals
108.26 Japanese Yen
Jul 11, 1:29 PM UTC

1 United States Dollar equals
6.87 Chinese Yuan
Jul 11, 1:31 PM UTC

1 United States Dollar equals
19.14 Mexican Peso
Jul 11, 1:32 PM UTC

1 United States Dollar equals
0.89 Euro
Jul 11, 1:33 PM UTC

1 United States Dollar equals
0.80 Pound sterling
Jul 11, 1:33 PM UTC

Gold price per ounce 1,423.00 +4.60

Silver Price Per Ounce $15.35 0.16

30-Year Fixed Rate 3.875% 3.989%

Current GDP info:

Economy looks pretty good to me today.


Because western news is carefully informed of domestic policy in the Soviet Union?

Somehow I don’t buy that. This was the singular motif of Gorbachev’s reign, alongside Glasnost, and you said you hadn’t even heard of it? Then it’s the same as being in the dark.

Meanwhile even Gorbachev himself credits perestroika for ending the USSR.

As when the economic crisis of the early 1990s hit, the newly empowered regional Governments of the Warsaw pact countries threatened to break from Moscow. Gorbachev threatened to resign in protest of them not signing his new “Union” pact that attempted to fix the problem, and roll back perestroika. We know how that turned out.


1 They may not have known Soviet military secrets, but public policy was somehow hidden from them?
2 I quoted where you were talking about Brezhnev in '79, and now we’re suddenly talking about Gorbachev in the '80s? Move any good goalposts lately? I said late '80s to early '90s, which is consistant with Gorbachev.

3 The Soviets bankrupted themselves trying rival Reagan’s military buildup (and the Space Shuttle). I don’t know about Gorbachev for sure, but other Russian officials concede that Reagan won the Cold War, not perestroika.


The Soviet Union had no need to be transparent to us. They had their own system of news aggregation just like the Chinese do today. They only shared what they felt like sharing.

And I gave a source mentioning Brezhnev introduced it in 1979.

Did you just… miss it? I put the relevant part in bold.

You’re making this either or, when it’s both.

Both contributed, my point, was that perestroika did it from the ground up. It changed the game for the people on the ground. And perestroika was put into place because the Soviet Union had an image problem with its own people.


And yet we knew all sorts of public policy issues in both China (Tiananmen Square Massacre, anyone?) and the Soviet Union that they didn’t want known abroad or even in the eyes of their own public. Big stuff doesn’t hide very well.

Then why did you feel the need to move the goalposts?


Isn’t it obvious?