"The Permanent Division of Europe"
One could say we sorta did accept "the permanent division of Europe," couldn't one? Yes, there are all the complicated and endless debates about what role Reagan's Cold War spending and steely-eyed gaze played in the collapse of Soviet and Eastern European communism. but our role in that, whatever it might have been, surely makes poor parallelism with Lincoln's role in the Civil War.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The actions America took to liberate Eastern Europe were a hell of a lot more mild than what objectively-pro-Baathist "doves" were proposing for Iraq three years ago.
Spot on, Joe. A better last line for that post would have ended, ", or with our current role in the Mideast."