I think the economic arms race was a bigger factor than just the military arms race. The US economy did not need to struggle to feed it’s people during the cold war while maintaining it’s military spending. The Soviet economy was not up to the task of maintaining both; or either as it turned out.
Probably the last truly funny thing Dennis Miller ever said;
“Who’d have thought that the problem with Communism would be that there’s no money in it?”
this article really ought to be read by progressives, and Obama himself
Can you give me some examples of why I should read it? I see no particular reason why I should add page views to a clickbait title on a politically biased website.
President Obama was not mentioned in the article. Do you have any examples of *his *anti-white rhetoric? His greatest crime was being elected president–twice–while not being 100% white.
The article’s illustration doesn’t shilly-shally with the Confederate Battle Flag–it uses the Swastika as the emblem of the Oppressed White Man.
Why?
…if only for the comedy value. “Non-whites are making me feel bad about being white just because many white people are doing bad things to them. Clearly it’s the fault of the non-whites for making me feel bad.” The butthurt, it is strong with that one.
This is the same nonsense that pervades the #notallmen and Gamergate crowd - a sense of whiny entitlement that having their personal feelings hurt is the worst crime in the world, worse than racism and rape and death threats and violence. Never mind the uncountable incidents of actual racism that pervade modern society; for some reason we need to stop everything to prevent these precious flowers - who likely rail against “political correctness” themselves - from having to acknowledge that people who share some characteristic with them are doing bad things.
It must be terrible to be them, the poor dears.
I’m not inclined to read your random links since you’ve obviously chosen to avoid answering questions posed directly to you and are now hiding behind words written by others.
Here’s a gem from that silly article:
I’ve never heard a Tejano, Mexican-American or Actual Mexican have one positive thing to say about Santa Anna. I doubt President Obama admires him, either.
As I’ve said before, at best in an indirect way. That’s a far cry from “We defeated communism!” when a) communism still exists and b) we didn’t. The Soviets chose to spend a large chunk of their economy on defense, nor was that anywhere near the only economic issue they faced. We didn’t defeat them on some ideological (or real) battlefield. It’s just another facile attempt at nationalism, and it’s not true.
What does the murder of various Black Panthers by the police have to do with white guys crying that they are oppressed?
new example of Obama being divisive; his speech in Hiroshima, which failed to emphasize that Japan attacked first.
Honestly, America deserves a President who actually represents their views on most things.
Funny how I never see you say anything positive about him. Basically, he can’t please you. I get that. But generalizing that to everyone else in the country just ain’t so.
I do have positive things to say about him; I do like Obamacare since it cuts out the ripoff “brokers” and takes the wool of the eyes of a plan buyer, I like his protection of abortion rights and the environment.
However, on Hiroshima, most polls indicate that Americans think it was the right thing to nuke it by wide margins
see:
https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/05/20/Americans-unapologetic-over-WW2-atom-bomb-attack/
http://www.pollingreport.com/japan.htm
While I’m away a CBS poll showed a divided public, its probably an outlier. Fact is Obama fails to represent or even acknowledge the majority stance on too much. Not only does it kind of feel like he thinks America is “unenlightened.”
Surely anyone who holds the view that Japan attacked first doesn’t need Obama to tell them that.
this is more an example of how extremely*** irrational ***you are about the subject…
It was a speech about the horror of war and nuclear weapons, not assigning blame. You’ll notice that he didn’t talk about blame at all, because that wasn’t what the speech was about.
You have shown no ability to rationally judge Obama in any way. I just wonder why you stopped calling him Hussein.
Nothing Obama said conflicted with this. He didn’t say we were wrong to drop the bomb.
In a speech meant to heal and soothe, blame doesn’t always have to be mentioned. In other speeches he has had no problem getting into the details of WW2, when appropriate.
You just can’t help but look at anything he does in the worst light possible. Your problem with him is personal, it’s clear, and has nothing to do with actual rhetoric or policy.
You can’t get blood from a turnip. Just enjoy the salad.
All right, tell you what. You write the speech. You write the speech for our president to recite at the heritage site of one of the only cases of nuclear warfare in world history. And you make it clear that Japan “shot first”. Here, let me start you out:
“So, before I begin this speech, let me preface it by saying that everything we did was completely justified. You guys started this war.”
…Huh. Seems a little incredibly tacky, misguided, and poorly-timed, doesn’t it?