Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ian G.R.
He had strong motivations, the problem with and a result of these strong motivations was that Nixon believed the ends justifies the means. He proved this by instigating horrible and bloody civil wars in South America to stop what he thought was dangerous communist encroachment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychol...rrilla_Warfare |
As I said, i'm not condoning his actions. Nixon took it too far, and Reagan knew who he could fuck and who he couldn't.
I'll explain. I beleive that the general population of the USA has... matured? not, not exactly the word, has grow more conscious about the rest of the world in the recent decades, as compared to the eighties.
Honeslty, who gave a fuck about the lives of a bunch of illiterate south american peasants as compared to fighting communism back then? Not Reagan and not the majority of the american population.
Nixon broke the american law and thus, pissed on its citizens, Reagan pissed all over the southern continent while keeping america clean.
I beleive Reagan represents the peak in american prowress, when being shamelessly greedy was not only not looked down on, but encouraged. Reagan armwrestled USA's archnemesis and won.
In a sense, I beleive Reagan represents the strong face of America in a time when it was clear who were the good guys and who were the bad guys.
Generally speaking people dislike shades of grey and prefer things that are presented to them in black and white. And that's what Reagan era was: a black and white landscape with no shades of grey.
I'm not surprised about the Reagan love in this era when black and white are not as clear and even the very basics of capitalism are being questioned.
People tend to retarct to childish mindsets (black and white) in times of economical and moral crisis (they often go hand by hand) such as this one.
Maybe I'm wrong, but it is my impression that Reagan faced little oposition within the USA about his actions on South America.
