Ronald Reagan – Despre prețul pe care nu-l vom plăti

    2

    Din discursul „A Time of Choosing”, 27 octombrie 1964:

    Let’s set the record straight. There is no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there is only one guaranteed way you can have peace – and you can have it in the next second – surrender.

    Admittedly there is a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson in history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face–that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight and surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand–the ultimatum. And what then? When Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we are retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary because by that time we will have weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he has heard voices pleading for „peace at any price” or „better Red than dead,” or as one commentator put it, he would rather „live on his knees than die on his feet.” And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don’t speak for the rest of us. You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin – just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard ‘round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn’t die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well, it’s a simple answer after all.

    You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, „There is a price we will not pay.” There is a point beyond which they must not advance.

    Winston Churchill said that „the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits – not animals.” And he said, „There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.”

    You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    2 COMENTARII

    1. Obama e un presedinte dezastruos. Sunt perfect de acord cu voi conservatorii.
      Sunt perfect de acord cu voi conservatorii in legatura cu Islamul.
      Si exemplele pot continua.

      Dar nu sunt de acord cu unele mituri pe care le raspanditi voi conservatorii.
      Nu zic ca Reagan a fost un presedinte rau dar nici pe departe n-a fost vreun erou de basm asa cum e infatisat de voi.

      John Stossel(o voce realista si neutra) despre Reagan:
      http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/blog/2011/02/07/realism-about-reagan

      President Ronald Reagan would have been 100 years old yesterday. Many conservatives are nostalgic for the days when he was president, saying he was the last great fiscal conservative. He did talk like one:

      “The most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”

      “We who live in free market societies believe that growth, prosperity and ultimately human fulfillment, are created from the bottom up, not the government down.”

      Right on.

      Reagan also read the books of my intellectual heroes, Milton Friedman and F.A. Hayek.

      But let’s not forget that despite President Reagan’s great free market talks, during his 8 years in office, the government:

      Increased federal spending by 53%.
      Tripled the federal debt.
      Increased foreign aid by nearly 120%.
      Doubled the Department of Education budget, despite promising to eliminate it altogether.
      Hired almost 250,000 new federal employees.
      Added more trade barriers than any administration since Herbert Hoover.
      Ramped up the War on Drugs; created a new “drug czar’s office.”
      Imposed a 100% tariff on some Japanese electronic products.

      [HT: Mises Institute]

      Regarding the famous Reagan tax cuts, the late economist Murray Rothbard wrote:

      The famous „tax cut” of 1981 did not cut taxes at all. It’s true that tax rates for higher-income brackets were cut; but for the average person, taxes rose, rather than declined. … [T]he cut in income tax rates was more than offset by two forms of tax increase. One was „bracket creep,” a term for inflation quietly but effectively raising one into higher tax brackets…The second source of higher taxes was Social Security taxation, which kept increasing, and which helped taxes go up overall.

      Reagan may have been known as the anti-government president, but he didn’t slow the growth of government. It makes me skeptical about the Tea Parties’ and Republicans’ promise to shrink big government. If the president who said “government is the problem” couldn’t cut government, can they?

      On my FBN show this week, I’ll talk about that with Reagan’s former budget director, David Stockman.

      Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/blog/2011/02/07/realism-about-reagan#ixzz2JKyQZFFe

    LĂSAȚI UN MESAJ

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here