Reagan said that he would break the stalemate with the Soviets by playing the arms race card.
He defined victory, executed a plan, and achieved it.
We call that "winning."
What makes you think, besides blind optimism in the future based on the past, that things will remain the same?
Here's a lesson: the best indicator we have for what the future will bring, since we're all blind to it, is to consider what has happened in the past. We refer to events of the past as "History."
We learn from History so as not to repeat its mistakes in the future. One of the mistakes the United States has made in the past is a failure to maintain overwhelming military superiority over any and all rivals. This was particulary costly with the Nazis and the Soviets. Our rivals then, as do the radical moslems and the Chinese Communists now, saw our failure as weakness, and were emboldened by it.
So military weakness is in the "mistakes to avoid" category.
But if I wanted to play your game for a moment, I might counter with. "What makes you think, besides the blind pessimism you've built on the downard momentum of your rant, that things will be any different?"
I have no love for Bill Clinton, but your statement doesn't add up. 9/11 isn't related to how many ABM's America has. What's the connection?
None, nor did I make one. Once again, not satisfied with the results of your own falsehoods, you create more to attribute to others... There's your friend, the Straw Man again. I said that Bill Clinton pursued a policy of Strength through wishful thinking, and your strings of ill-considered platitudes suggest nothing more.
It's been said he didn't need to get out of it to build missile defense. So then why?
"It's been said" that Santa is coming. Doesn't make it so.
An appeal to anonymous (and dubious) authority... Can't say as I've seen that particular form of fallacy from you before.
