I do not believe anyone can belay that Reagen was at the very least part of the overall reason for the collapse. Was he the sole proprietor of the collapse? Certainly not. I do however think most here need to give more credit to Reagan that what has been offered thus far. So far the naysayers have done nothing but crap on Reagan.

Reagan as much directly contributed to the tearing down of the wall as Kennedy was a true Berliner.

Sorry, but he is massively overstimated, because he made his people feel good with his low sounding voice of his, you see. ;)

The wall was not teared down by either Reagan or Gobatchev or the Westgermans. It were the Eastgermans. Reagan did not much to help it and official Us policy did not want it, Gorbatchev did not want it happening, but refused to prevent it by force.

France did not want it. England did not want it. Westergermany did not expect it either (but always said that it was the goal of inner-German politics). The only ones who both wanted it and pushed for it, were the Eastgerman people. They did the deeds, they took the risks.

They just had simply enough of it, and history opened the window of opportunity by having put a relative "philantropist" in charge of the Kreml. What, regarding these events, cannot be said of Thatcher, Bush and Mitterand. If it would have gone according to them in Octobre, Novembre 1989, the Eastgermans would still live in tyranny.

He was at the right place at the right time and he enjoyed the show.
If another guy were president of the United States at the time, the Soviet System would still have collapsed. It ran literally out of fuel with or without and kind of american ingerence, and the deck of cards came crumbling one on top of the other. The problems of the Soviet System didn't begin and end with the Reagan administration. From an historic point of view you have to see the big picture.
Reagan had a great rhetoric, and he was lucky to be president during the last days of communism and to witness its downfall.

Actually George H. W. Bush was president when the wall came down, and when the Soviet Union collapsed.:03:

Skybird and goldrak....you guys are nuts......as I stated, Reagan was certainly a part but not the sole reason for the wall coming down. Stop belittling what he did do at this critical time....






http://www.courier-journal.com/artic...an+s+challenge?

I know, Reagan was not president at the time the wall collapsed, but he still witnessed the events.
And many people still think that it is because of his presidency that communism collapsed in europe.
So yes I don't think its an overstatement in saying he was at the right place at the right time. :03:

It is an overstatement no matter how you cut it. Read the article link I posted above. The collapse did not happen overnight as Skybird said. It was a culmination of MANY things INCLUSIVE of Reagan's actions/speeches that precipitated the wall coming down. How can anyone deny Reagan was not a part of it?

I read the article and I agree to a certain extent with the conclusions.
I also said that the Soviet Union didn't collapse overnight, and that socio-economical, political and military problems that spanned decades were the root cause of its downfall.
I also never said Reagan didn't play a part in all of this, I just think that his part was pretty small in the grand scale of the events of '89.

That is true to a certain extent, yet it is those who are heavily elevating Reagans role in the events who are revising history.
The best summary so far for the resasonfor that revisionis is AVGs.....
That feelgood factor has among some morphed into a revision of the reality of events to fit their rose tinted view and a blindness to the actual outcomes of his presidency.

That is a little off target, the topic starts with a perfect example of the revisionism.
"the real reason the wall fell....Ronald Reagan."

Dont waste your breath. Their minds are made up and thats all there is to it.

Actually, the argument you were proposing was that the Soviets did NOT try to follow suit with Reagan's defense spending. Which was wrong.

And that spending directly led to many of the policies which ultimately collapsed the USSR.

Regarding SDI, my point still stands.

However small...still a part:up: I'm just getting the feeling here some believe Reagan was not a part however small. Lets look at it like a carburetor, without the mixture needle (a very very small part) the carburetor will not work.

They're mad at Daddy. :)

Yes and no, completely crossing any sentence out with Reagan noted in it concerning the collapse would be a great injustice not only to Reagan but the entire incident as a whole. For those such as Skybird who relish and bask in the glow of obtaining factual evidence, I'm surprised at his response that Reagan was nothing more that a guy at the podium saying a few things.

To which a few harped in that Reagan was nothing short of a stuffed shirt. Seems there is revisionism on both fronts but who am I to judge? :shifty: