PDA

View Full Version : Good Morning..."Reagan Doctrine" unveiled



Okla-homey
2/6/2007, 08:01 AM
Feb 6, 1985: "Dutch" Reagan announces a new doctrine

http://aycu31.webshots.com/image/10910/2000810376389377367_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2000810376389377367)
Gone, but his legacy continues to linger

Twenty-two years ago, on this day back in 1985, President Ronald Reagan defined some of the key concepts of his foreign policy in his State of the Union address, establishing what came to be known as the "Reagan Doctrine." The doctrine served as the foundation for the Reagan administration's support of "freedom fighters" around the globe.

http://aycu27.webshots.com/image/8066/2003709356403995226_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2003709356403995226)

Reagan began his foreign policy comments with the dramatic pronouncement that, "Freedom is not the sole prerogative of a chosen few; it is the universal right of all God's children." America's "mission" was to "nourish and defend freedom and democracy."

http://aycu31.webshots.com/image/10910/2000836873702902361_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2000836873702902361)
Pres. RWR and VP GHWB

More specifically, Reagan declared that, "We must stand by our democratic allies. And we must not break faith with those who are risking their lives-on every continent, from Afghanistan to Nicaragua-to defy Soviet-supported aggression and secure rights which have been ours from birth." He concluded, "Support for freedom fighters is self-defense."

http://aycu35.webshots.com/image/10234/2000838806192610335_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2000838806192610335)
Anti-Sandanista "Contras" in Nicaragua c.1980

With these words, the Reagan administration laid the foundation for its program of military assistance to "freedom fighters." In action, this policy translated into covertly supporting the Contras in their attacks on the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua; the Afghan rebels in their fight against the Soviet occupiers; and anticommunist Angolan forces embroiled in that nation's civil war.

http://aycu32.webshots.com/image/9471/2000847613838044911_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2000847613838044911)
Afghan fighters c. 1980

President Reagan continued to defend his actions throughout his two terms in office. During his farewell address in 1989, he claimed success in weakening the Sandinista government, forcing the Soviets to withdraw from Afghanistan, and bringing an end to the conflict in Angola.

http://aycu15.webshots.com/image/9774/2003707420690123955_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2003707420690123955)

Domestic critics, however, decried his actions, claiming that the support of so-called "freedom fighters" resulted only in prolonging and escalating bloody conflicts and in U.S. support of repressive and undemocratic elements in each of the respective nations.

http://aycu40.webshots.com/image/9919/2000868378065701765_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2000868378065701765)

What do you think? Most now acknowledge that propping up governments simply because they are anti-communist hasn't worked very well over the long term. Many have opined that America's historic and relatively unconditional support of Israel in her struggle for survival is the source of most of the angst we feel from Arab states.

Should America as the "only remaining superpower" involve itself in the internal affairs of other nations and regions with an aim to advance our national interests, or should we stay out of regional conflicts? Do we have any moral obligation to intervene in places like the Sudan to ameliorate great suffering and stop genocide? What should be America's international role? Armed democracy advocate? Peace enforcer? Peace broker? Officious intermeddler? Concerned onlooker? Grantor of humanitarian largesse? Or some combination of all of these?

http://aycu35.webshots.com/image/10234/2000883266796401404_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2000883266796401404)
RWR's grave on his ranch in California

http://aycu13.webshots.com/image/10852/2003762384634492655_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2003762384634492655)

tbl
2/6/2007, 08:56 AM
What do you think? Most now acknowledge that propping up governments simply because they are anti-communist hasn't worked very well over the long term.

Hitler was anti-communist, as were the Taliban. Most of us are too, but that obviously doesn't make you a "good guy".


Many have opined that America's historic and relatively unconditional support of Israel in her struggle for survival is the source of most of the angst we feel from Arab states.

Should America as the "only remaining superpower" involve itself in the internal affairs of other nations and regions with an aim to advance our national interests, or should we stay out of regional conflicts? Do we have any moral obligation to intervene in places like the Sudan to ameliorate great suffering and stop genocide? What should be America's international role? Armed democracy advocate? Peace enforcer? Peace broker? Officious intermeddler? Concerned onlooker? Grantor of humanitarian largesse? Or some combination of all of these?

Are you trying to make a post that will shut down the board??? ;)

Ike
2/6/2007, 10:17 AM
What do you think? Most now acknowledge that propping up governments simply because they are anti-communist hasn't worked very well over the long term. Many have opined that America's historic and relatively unconditional support of Israel in her struggle for survival is the source of most of the angst we feel from Arab states.

Should America as the "only remaining superpower" involve itself in the internal affairs of other nations and regions with an aim to advance our national interests, or should we stay out of regional conflicts? Do we have any moral obligation to intervene in places like the Sudan to ameliorate great suffering and stop genocide? What should be America's international role? Armed democracy advocate? Peace enforcer? Peace broker? Officious intermeddler? Concerned onlooker? Grantor of humanitarian largesse? Or some combination of all of these?



well......






I forget.
;)

royalfan5
2/6/2007, 10:33 AM
Well Daniel Ortega is president of Nicaragua, so in the long run the Sandanistas won that one.

TUSooner
2/6/2007, 11:33 AM
I miss the Commies. <sniff>

Okla-homey
2/6/2007, 11:42 AM
well......






I forget.
;)

My point exactly. This stuff is hard and NOBODY has the precise answer. IMHO, all we can do is do our best. I suggest moderation is generally the best course of action. We can't be world cops, but we can't sit back behind our oceans and cower either.

royalfan5
2/6/2007, 11:45 AM
My point exactly. This stuff is hard and NOBODY has the precise answer. IMHO, all we can do is do our best. I suggest moderation is generally the best course of action. We can't be world cops, but we can't sit back behind our oceans and cower either.
couldn't we just sacrifice California and call it good?