Ronald Reagan Caused 9/11

I’m going to go out on a limb here and say something controversial. Ronald Reagan caused 9/11. Not single-handedly of course (that would give him too much credit). But, his actions led directly to 9/11. And to this day, his followers are not equipped to handle the post-Soviet Union world.

If you listen to most Republicans, Reagan was solely responsible for “winning” the Cold War. Their fantasy is that Regan’s strength and power lead the Soviets to only one conclusion: Their time was through, so they should throw in the towel. This scenario is highly doubtful. Reagan was responsible for the largest peacetime military build-up in US history. He presided over the greatest budget deficits in US history. The National Defense Budget reached a high in 1985. Reagan's buildup, in today's dollars, peaked at $494 billion that year. Think about it: Reagan was spending more on the defense budget during peacetime than any other president since WWII, including the time during the Korea and Vietnam conflicts. Ronald Reagan out-spent the Soviet Union. In their efforts to keep pace with America, their economy crumbled. There was no historic “clash of the Titans” in which Reagan prevailed. He may have told Gorbachev to “tear down this wall,” but his most direct contribution to the end of the Cold War was outrageous defense spending.

The Soviet Union spent an ever-increasing percentage of their budget on defense in order to keep up with Reagan. This directly led to economic downturn and the decline of the USSR. The Soviet Union fell apart. And with that, the fate of thousands of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons fell into the unknown. As Russia struggled to guard and maintain its arsenal, desperate scientists and soldiers were selling their wares to the highest bidder. When a wealthy individual could possess the same capabilities as a nation, that person could make their message heard around the world.

The fall of the USSR ushered in the modern terrorist era. Whereas before we were pitched against a nation, we were now defending ourselves against an enemy without borders who did not operate in accordance with international law. We were now the lone “superpower”; a giant in the world, but unable to look down and see the threats developing all around us.

The World Trade center bombings in 1993 should have been the wake-up call. America was the target, but we weren't being targeted in traditional ways. The new enemy did not follow the same rules. The new enemy did not practice diplomacy nor was he confined to borders. Terrorists moved underneath the radar, praying on the poor governments.

Clinton was trying to move the military in the right direction. A faster, lighter force that could defeat guerilla enemies would need to replace the hulking might that was needed to counter the USSR. He was also working the diplomatic side of the issue. If we could aid the nations where terrorists sought refuge, we could flush them out. If we could entice democracy, the terrorists would lose their footholds.

However, the Reagan faithful saw things differently. When they saw Clinton cut the Pentagon budget, they saw liberal destruction of the Regan strength. No one bothered to address the fact that Reagan built the military up to unsustainable and impractical peacetime levels. Additionally, the success of high-tech munitions in the first Gulf War should have proven the need for “quality” over “quantity”.

They failed to take stock of the new world order and adjust their thinking to match reality. Instead, the Reagan conservatives try to mold the new world order into the old good-vs-evil thinking.

So there we were, trapped in the past to Ronald Reagan’s legacy. Our government officials were too comfortable with how things used to be to realize what they really were. On the eve of those attacks, George W. Bush was elected. He surrounded himself with advisors from his father’s presidency, or even earlier. Men who also thought in the past, who couldn’t see something like this coming. And then it came.

Now here we are, almost seven years later, on the eve of another historic election. The past seven years can be summed up in one word: disaster. The economy is a disaster, the Global War on Terrorism is a disaster, America’s social progress has come to a standstill. What can we do now? Do we elect a leader who has promised us more of the same? Do we elect a leader who will surround himself with advisors from the past?

No. That is not the answer. Bush has proven that we cannot look to the past in order to solve the problems of the future. We must elect a candidate who will have a fresh view. We must elect someone who will move America forward, not backwards. We must move on!