From: Rob Gross (moderator)
<GR...@BCVMS.BITNET/GR...@BCVMS.BC.EDU>
Saturday, August 28, 1993, 17:20 EDT
Arms Discussion Digest
Volume 11 : Issue 8
All submissions to ARM...@BUACCA.BU.EDU (ARM...@BUACCA.BITNET)
Please do not post articles, as they have a high probability
of being lost.
Today's topics:
Re: Arms-Discussion Digest V11 #7 (Ron Mock)
Short reflections on the fall of the Soviet Union ("Wm. Michael Dante")
Bob Perry's "In reply to M. Cobb's question" ("Wm. Michael Dante")
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 15:11:37 PST
From: rm...@foxmail.gfc.edu (Ron Mock)
Organization: George Fox College, Newberg, Oregon USA
Subject: Re: Arms-Discussion Digest V11 #7
G. Simon Harak, S. J.(Ha...@Loyola.edu; Ha...@Loyvax.bitnet) writes:
> Figures on their (Soviet military) spending, we now know, were
> highly exaggerated in the typical "worst case scenario," in the
> bad conversion we did from rubles to dollars, and from just plain
> lying.
As probable as this sounds, I still want to know how we know
this. Citations?
--------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 93 09:34:47 -0400
From: "Wm. Michael Dante" <dan...@sc3d1053h.acq.osd.mil>
Subject: Short reflections on the fall of the Soviet Union
I agree with Simon Harak that it is a bit simplistic to say
that we "spent them into the ground." Nevertheless, the
statistic he cites does not support his argument. If "figures
throughout the cold war show that Soviet military spending
increased about 3% every year" that would certainly be a major
cause of the Soviet collapse. 3% every year for forty years is a
326% increase. To impose such a burden on a weak, stagnant
economy guarantees ultimate collapse.
But, of course, the real cause of the Soviet collapse was the
Soviet system itself. Socialism for a major country has been
proven an economic disaster. It may be useful for control and
subjugation, but, as predicted, it is worthless for improving the
lives of people. Indeed, throughout the history of the Socialist
Empire collapse has been averted only by retreating to some more
or less disguised concession to free enterprise (the most famous
was the first, Lenin's "New Economic Policy.") If U.S. Policy
during the 80's induced the Soviets not to reduce their
misallocation of resources then it is fair to say that it was the
straw that caused the fall.
The statement about "our military's attempt to co-opt the
revolution by calling it a military victory" is somewhat of a
strawman. From the first time I listened to a lecture by the
military on defense policy (in the 50's) I have heard a
consistent message from the military that a "military victory"
over the Soviet Union would be a FAILURE of defense policy. The
policy, even with different names, of containment until Socialism
collapsed under its own self contradictions, has been a
consistent position by the military throughout the cold war. The
success of that policy is what the military claims, I have never
heard anyone claim a "military victory."
But I certainly agree that the people who resisted socialist
domination deserve major credit for their bravery and resolution.
The collapse of the Soviet Union however could not have been
brought about just by such bravery. Simon Harak mentions
"hundreds of thousands who stood up to the Soviet Union." But we
should not forget that the Soviet Union slaughtered tens of
millions of its own citizens who were merely in the way.
--------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 93 18:48:17 -0400
From: "Wm. Michael Dante" <dan...@sc3d1053h.acq.osd.mil>
Subject: Bob Perry's "In reply to M. Cobb's question"
> If anything, the US's "victory" is Pyrrhic at best. Our spoils
> include: the world's highest national debt, an ever-increasing
> crime rate, and a deteriorating standard of living
You forgot AIDS, abductions by aliens, Bill Clinton, and the
Colts sneaking out of Baltimore.
Would you even consider the possibility that some things
happened in the last 40 years that weren't caused by the evil
Americans opposing people's democracies?
--------------------------
End of Arms-Discussion Digest
**************************