Originally posted by Sabre
Certainly a lot of money went into SDI. However, surely you're not claiming that the entire deficit, or even the lion's share of the deficit during the 80's was due to SDI. If so, I'd ask what figures you have to back that up, as I'm somewhat dubious of such a sweeping claim. Also, while some of the projects that were funded by SDI turned out to be technologic dead-ends, it none the less was arguabley a contributing factor to the collapse of the Soviet Union, and thus money well spent, IMO. Not to mention the wealth of technology developed that did find it's way into military and civilian use.
Oh, and Congress controls military spending, as you know.
No, not claiming anything. It's a fact that can be readily verified with some minor research ... google ... whatever.
It's quite funny. Republicans want to give Reagan credit for burying the old Soviet Union, but they want no part of his budget deficit excesses.
However, it appears to me that you want to give the democrats credit for spending the USSR into bankruptcy ... congress controls military spending ...
That's a novel thought.
While you're looking up budget deficits, you might also look at some of the claims made by Reagan concerning his role in WW2, all widely reported by the news.
I've always been surprised that George Bush Sr. would have had anything to do with Reagan. After all, Bush went in harms way during WW2. Reagan on the other hand told monstrous lies concerning his role during WW2.
Most politicians readily lie - I guess we all expect it. But I've never been ready to accept a president lying about what he did during a war.
Bush did correctly identify "trickle down economics" as "voodoo economics." Remember that? But then he became a running mate and well then, it's only politics.
curly
