http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/11/the-2013-index-of-dependence-on-government
Posted on 03/18/2014 11:38:18 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
Russian takeover of the Crimea, as well as many of our problems in the Middle East, was funded by high oil prices. Since there is no military solution to the Crimea conflict, President Obama should look closely at the successful pages of the Reagan playbook.
Before the Reagan and Gorbachev Summits could begin, Reagan needed to rebuild our defenses to bring the Soviets back to the bargaining table. The Kremlin was pressured to end the Cold War on America’s terms because of President Reagan’s policies of supporting the mujahedeen in Afghanistan, deploying Pershing cruise missiles in Western Europe (to counter Soviet SS-20s), advocating the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), and doubling the defense budget.
The Saudis worked with the Reagan Administration to keep the pressure on Moscow by increasing oil production to drop prices during the mid-1980s. Since oil and gas accounted for more than half of the Soviets’ cash exports, the decision of Saudi Oil Minister Sheik Ahmed Yamani to discontinue the policy of limiting oil production dropped the price of oil from a monthly average of $29.18 in November, 1985 to $9.88 in July 1986.
By the time Reagan met Gorbachev at Reykjavik in October 1986, oil prices had only partially rebounded to a monthly average of $14.01. The Soviet leader would angrily tell Reagan that he didn’t have the money for the grain he had agreed to buy from America’s farmers.
Gorbachev said: “The money we would have used is still in the United States, or maybe Saudi Arabia, because of the fall in oil prices.” As the Saudis were increasing their oil production, the Soviets were losing $20 billion a year. If Gorbachev could not persuade Reagan to give up the Strategic Defense Initiative at Reykjavik, then the Russians would have to eventually capitulate. Reagan said, “no.”
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
What does Obama do? The exact opposite, naturally.
Putin and Obama - the perfect storm for people who support freedom.
“WHAT WOULD REAGAN DO?”
NOTHING AT ALL.
Because with Reagan in the White house, such nonsense would have never happened in the first place. But when the occupant is a pushover, why shouldn’t the world have some fun?
Reagan would’ve acted before it became a crisis, ie, by making it known that he seriously defends freedom and by maintaining the most powerful military in the world to make it so!
RWR committed to SDI and Russia blinked.
They could not build an equal defensive system without bankrupting they citizenry. Millions would die due to starvation as the communists diverted more and more “social welfare” funding in an attempt to equal the US “star wars” system.
When RWR made the sound check -in jest- that “The bombing will commence in 5 minutes.”, Russia, ^at that very moment^, knew all was lost; communism was a failed concept in the face of capitalism that unabashedly supports a military-industrial complex.
Reference: Alinsky: “Ridicule is your most potent weapon.”
President Reagan’s “peace through strength” worked, the clown in the WH now doesn’t know the meaning of strength.
Start drilling like crazy.
Heard John Bolton talk about Obama’s pompous SoS Kerry. Bolton compared Kerry to Putin as “a cupcake to a steak knife.” Got a new tagline out of it.
Carter with his Olympics fiasco and Reagan with supplying sidewinders to the head chopping Afghans was a mistake.
We now have more in common with the Russians, 'population only 140 mil', than we have with our real enemies, the Islamists.
Lets not get distracted. Obama, by playing it softly is doing the right thing.
Feb 28th 2014 - U.S. President Obama warns that there will be costs to the Russians for any military intervention in the Ukraine. The president does not explain what those costs will be.
March 1 – Russia’s parliament approves President Vladimir Putin’s request to use Russian forces in Ukraine. Ukraine’s Acting President Olexander Turchynov puts his army on full alert.
I think Reagan would have given business to Ukraine - bought a massive amount of Ukraine steel and had it formed into weapons that he would have parked on Vlad’s doorstep. The announcement would have come hours after we’d inked the deal on the steel so he could announce it was already done. His announcement would be in person and it would be succinct.
Build missile defense in Poland.
You’re missing the point. Obama brought this about by projecting weakness.
Exactly. Going back to the fall of the Soviet Union, Reagan would have engaged much more with those countries in the aftermath because he would have understood the importance to the world of ensuring freedom in those countries.
Reagan would not have sent over a bunch of Ivy League professors disdainful of free markets to teach them how to rebuild their societies economically. Reagan would have pushed the importance of the rule of law and economic, political and religious freedom. Instead, Clinton sent over Gore and they got authoritarianism, mafia rule and crony capitalism.
Great answer and true if the circumstances now were the same as they were in the 1980's. I find it ironic though that the USSR of the 1980's suffered from a collapsing economy and was war weary from an adventure in Afghanistan while the United States is now suffering from a collapsing economy and is war weary from an adventure in Afghanistan.
My hope is that Reagan would recognize a dangerous maniac with world domination ambitions and take urgent action setting example to others. Entire Russian nation with few exceptions is cheering their Fuhrer, therefore they all should bear the consequences. Our reaction is always late and always ineffective to prevent the next assault. Reagan would be proactive. The world needs to rid of this cancer, even surgically if needed. I mean nuclear medicine - I heard it has become very effective lately.
Probably do some things to show solidarity with Ukraine similar to Poland in the '80s
But I really agree with others--RWR would be five moves ahead of Putin and would never let it happen IMO...
We have to admit that it was easier for Ronald Reagan to cope with Russia in many aspects because there was Gorby. Putin is no Gorbachev.
Looks like now Obama is Gorby and Putin is Reagan...
Reagan defeating the Soviets in Afghanistan played a major role in defeating the empire.
Those missiles did that.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/11/the-2013-index-of-dependence-on-government
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.