Gates Proposing Cuts in Military Budget

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Hardly. Reagan was a big spender. Welcome back.

But very targeted big spending. Reagan spending collapsed the Soviet Union.

Good to be here.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

But very targeted big spending. Reagan spending collapsed the Soviet Union.

Debatable. Lots of revision over the years by the cult of Reagan. I used to subscribe to that view. Now I see him as just another free-spending politico. Nothing magic about the man.

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Debatable. Lots of revision over the years by the cult of Reagan. I used to subscribe to that view. Now I see him as just another free-spending politico. Nothing magic about the man.

Former Soviet reality is enough to convince me. If you cannot see the difference it is because you were born in the late 1970/early 1980's. Those of us born earlier can recognize the reality easily.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Former Soviet reality is enough to convince me. If you cannot see the difference it is because you were born in the late 1970/early 1980's. Those of us born earlier can recognize the reality easily.

Ah. So my age places my views on the Index Prohibitorum. I suppose that is a convenient enough tool for silencing dissent. Of course, if what you say were true, everyone born prior to the dates you listed would be lock-step in their opinions. I wonder if that is true.

[Ducimus]

You know, one of the biggest problems with neoconservatives, is they seem plan, act, talk, etc, like the US is still the all powerful and influential nation it was during the cold war. The world has changed since then, and is no longer the place where nations had to ally themselves with either the soviet bloc, or the US lead Nato/western alliance. That scenario gave us economic and political clout we no longer have.

[Gerald]

So now let's talk about the Catholic Church, which is quite distant from the main issue, but neither Reagan or age,has nothing to do with this

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Ah. So my age places my views on the Index Prohibitorum. I suppose that is a convenient enough tool for silencing dissent. Of course, if what you say were true, everyone born prior to the dates you listed would be lock-step in their opinions. I wonder if that is true.

That was not my intent...to silence you...it was my intent to ask you to look deeper and employ your greater mind to go outside today's reality to examine the reality which came before you. History is about the 'place of the then' , not the place of the then seen through the eyes of today.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Vendor

So now let's talk about the Catholic Church, which is quite distant from the main issue, but neither Reagan or age,has nothing to do with this

You got the Catholic Church thing from my prohibitorum reference.

But, you're right; Reagan doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

You got the Catholic Church thing from my prohibitorum reference.

But, you're right; Reagan doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand.

Well, you never now

Originally Posted by Ducimus

You know, one of the biggest problems with neoconservatives, is they seem plan, act, talk, etc, like the US is still the all powerful and influential nation it was during the cold war. The world has changed since then, and is no longer the place where nations had to ally themselves with either the soviet bloc, or the US lead Nato/western alliance. That scenario gave us economic and political clout we no longer have.

You seem to have the same vision as many weak folks. Until you and yours change their attitude you can count on the place you hold. California?

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

That was not my intent...to silence you...it was my intent to ask you to look deeper and employ your greater mind to go outside today's reality to examine the reality which came before you. History is about the 'place of the then' , not the place of the then seen through the eyes of today.

Oh, no. That was the intent. Don't worry, I'm not afraid of you. In fact, I used to be you. When I used to look back at history, I did so with blinders, so to speak. I adhered to the Index, conveniently disregarding anything that conflicted with [then] my world view as biased and invalid. The world was black and white; there were good guys and bad guys. But then I came to the realization that, most of the time, it isn't a game of cowboys and indians and one man's hero is always another man's villain.

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

You got the Catholic Church thing from my prohibitorum reference.

But, you're right; Reagan doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand.

Yet you addressed Mr. Reagan as an over spender. It wasn't until after your position was revealed as flawed that you want to change the subject.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Yet you addressed Mr. Reagan as an over spender. It wasn't until after your position was revealed as flawed that you want to change the subject.

When did that happen? I said that Reagan was a big spender. You agreed with that, calling it 'targeted spending', and saying that it had a purpose. I said that I thought that the effect of that spending has been distorted by revisionists. You then said that I was too young to have an informed opinion. Well, that's one way to do things, I guess.

[Ducimus]

Third man back to trolling I see. Nice bait, make a strong, yet subtle personal attack at a persons core and station in life. His troll Fu is strong. I can has report post button?

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Oh, no. That was the intent. Don't worry, I'm not afraid of you.

How is that possible. You a Moderator, large contributor, etc.

How is it that I can possibly intimidate your standing on SubSim? Your like a Nancy Pelosi (safe district) of Subsim.