3 ms·
of course it was a decades long policy, but Reagan takes the laurels because his predecessor was appeasing USSR and Reagan did the exact opposite, bringing abou
by flavius29663 4y ago
of course it was a decades long policy, but Reagan takes the laurels because his predecessor was appeasing USSR and Reagan did the exact opposite, bringing about the downfall of the USSR. If a new Carter would have been in power, I am not sure 1989 would have happen when it did.
- woodruffw 4y agoThis is somewhat ahistorical: Carter's initial policy towards the USSR was a continuation of the "detente" policy pursued by multiple administrations, beginning in the 1960s. But it quickly shifted towards a much more aggressive policy, following the USSR's engagement in Afghanistan. If anything, Reagan continued his predecessor's aggressive policies. Reagan was instrumental in the USSR's final years and even more instrumental in the policies that built the oligopoly that followed it. But singling him out for laurels does not accurately reflect either the USSR's internal politics or the 50 years of US foreign policy that brought us to 1991.