Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War.
Vote Here
The voting period for this debate does not end.
| Started: | 7/8/2008 | Category: | Politics |
| Updated: | 1 month ago | Status: | Voting Period |
| Viewed: | 134 times | Debate No: | 4636 |
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (20)
|
I'm tired of people praising Ronald Reagan "because he ended the Cold War". The Soviet Union split up. They voted for the split of the Union because their government was inefficient. The correct statement would be "The Cold War ended during Reagan's presidential term". Reagan did nothing contributing to the fall of the Soviet Union.
I think you're in desperate need of taking a crash course in economics. Communism can't handle feeding its own people let alone compete with the U.S. in proxy wars and an arms race. When there is no incentive to work harder than the workers under such a system will do the bare minimum. Ronald Reagan drove the USSR to its collapse much faster than it would have on its own. Reagan did a wonderful job of keeping the communists from expanding their influence and power by the policy of containment. He furthermore refused to be an appeaser which caused the USSR to spend money on military buildup that it didn't have. You seem to have immense difficulty in comprehending the overall big picture of an affair. The Soviet Union did indeed vote to split up because their government was inefficient. For some strange reason you don't then ask yourself why the government was inefficient. It was inefficient because it was pressured internally and externally. Who do you think handled the job of the latter? That's right it was Ronald Reagan. With communism's inherit inability to compete with the United States it was driven to collapse on itself. When there is no reward system for a higher quality of work then it's a race to the bottom. With this knowledge at hand there is no other conclusion but Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War. |
![]() |
|
<<For some strange reason you don't then ask yourself why the government was inefficient. It was inefficient because it was pressured internally and externally.>>
What does Communism had to do with the outside pressure? The people of the Soviet Union ended the Cold War in a vote to split up the Union. They weren't doing well not because of the arms race! It was because Communism is inefficient and invites ruthless dictators to rape the people of the money they deserve from their hard work. The Soviet Union already had enough nuclear warheads to annihilate America. They just didn't want a war breaking out and neither did the U.S.A.. My point still stands. Ronald Reagan was not responsible for the collapse of the Soviet Union, because the people of the Soviet Union had a vote for its own collapse.
You have a terrible time at grasping concepts don't you? I'll make it simple: #1. Soviet Union is already collapsing on itself due to a flawed economic system. #2. Ronald Reagan challenges their power. #3. Soviet Union feels threatened and spends money that they wouldn't have otherwise to confront the United States. #4. Due to the Soviet Union spending more money that they don't have cause of Ronald Reagan it causes an escalation to its downfall. #5. This bankruptcy that came sooner cause of Ronald Reagan motivates the people of the USSR to elect a new government. CONCLUSION: Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War. "The Soviet Union already had enough nuclear warheads to annihilate America." They had roughly enough nuclear bombs to end the world several times over. Did that stop their arms race? No. "My point still stands. Ronald Reagan was not responsible for the collapse of the Soviet Union, because the people of the Soviet Union had a vote for its own collapse." The people wouldn't have voted for regime change during Ronald Reagan's term if it weren't for his policies. |
![]() |
|
<<You have a terrible time at grasping concepts don't you?>>
I don't care for your insults... You are wrong on #4. First think about whether the Soviet Union could just end the arms race. They could! The United States would not attack either way. Secondly, think about whether Ronald Reagan did anything to continue the arms race. Or was it his advisers? Or congress? Or his predecessors? Thank you for this debate.
"You are wrong on #4. First think about whether the Soviet Union could just end the arms race. They could!" They could but did not. "The United States would not attack either way." Have you ever heard of the Cuban Missile Crisis? "Secondly, think about whether Ronald Reagan did anything to continue the arms race." Are you being serious? How could you overlook him stockpiling nukes and containing communism which was a major part of his legacy? "Or was it his advisers? Or congress? Or his predecessors?" You have provided no evidence to this speculation. "Thank you for this debate." Thank you for your time as well. |
![]() |
20 votes have been cast for this debate.
Coming in September, 2008
A complete graphical breakdown of the votes by:
- Age Group
- Country
- Education
- Ethnicity
- Gender
- Ideology
- Income
- Political Party
- Religion
Show people this debate by sending them this public link:












There is no doubt that Reagan defeated those Commies by pressuring them economically and militarily. SDI was the final straw that broke those red bastards.
Yeah, I'm sure "the people voted" to break apart the Soviet Union....since they've had so much voting power in the past.