Re: REALLY OT: News Flash
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 10:58:38 -0800 (PST), Francis wrote in message
> Ron Johnson <email@example.com> wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED
> MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
> On 02/24/07 02:33, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> >> On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 04:32:04PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> >> - he decided to outspend the Soviets to bankrupt them
> > Never mind that the Soviet Union would have collapsed with or
> > without Reagan. The average Soviet citizen wasn't exactly living the
> > dream, after all, and happy people don't grow suspicious. Glasnost
...and perestroyka was all about stick pitch forks thru the fur into
bear flesh to try get the Red Army, Air Force, Navy etc military
industrial complex up on its knees and going again, it was collapsing
under the Party membership peeing down each others backs to gloss over
the thruth. Fortunately, some bright spark decided to reuse this
propaganda on the West, and fortunately this same propaganda had the
Russian people outsmart the communist regime and fortunately they never
found out before it was Too Late. Me, I was certain all the way to 1991
the Soviet Union use nukes to stop it. Thank you, Russia! :o)
> > was inevitable
..aye, but how many of us on the western side could know for sure
before Russia Left the SU? Or even on the eastern side?
> > and had far more to do with the Russia's withdrawl
> > from the Soviet Union causing it's ultimate collapse.
> Every country collapses eventually.
> In 19*81*, was there *any* /consensus/ that the Evil Empire would fall
> in only 9 years?
> A big reason that neither side predicted the collapse of the soviet
> union was that the soviets didn't know how to accurately measure
> their economy and our intellignece services were looking at the same
> bad data as the Pollitt Bureau.
..me too. ;o)
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.