trb@drutx.UUCP (BuckleyTR) (01/16/85)
It seems that one of the most widely held opinions in the entire world is that the government of the United States, especially the Reagan administration, is militantly anti-Communist. Merely to suggest the opposite view is to invite either a heavy dose of ridicule or a form of pity usually reserved for victims of mental disorder. After all, politicians have been parading the "Communist Threat" around for decades to justify the ever-increasing military budget and expanding federal government. And Ronald Reagan is the very epitome of anti-communism. So why is Reagan the best friend the liberals have had in years? Let's look at performance vs. rhetoric. In a series of personally signed directives, President Reagan has stated that "it is in the national interest" for the taxpayer-funded Export-Import Bank to supply low-cost loans and guarantees of $66 million to Communist China for power generating equipment, $120 million to Communist Rumania for nuclear steam turbines, and $68 million to Communist China to build a steel-making plant. Ex-Im Bank funds have also been supplied to Communist Yugoslavia for military training. On June 12, 1984, President Reagan signed a directive stating that "the furnishing of defense articles and services to the Government of China will strengthen the security of the United States and promote world peace." He was talking about Red China. Early in 1982, federal officials directed that taxpayer funds be used to assume huge debts run up by Communist Poland. As a result, over a half billion dollars went to keep the Jaruzelski regime in power. And our refusal to declare Poland in default - AS WAS REQUIRED BY LAW - guaranteed that vitally needed trade will continue to flow from the U.S. and other Western nations to Poland and other Communist dictatorships. In mid-1983, our Secretary of Agriculture went to Moscow to sign a new five-year agreement committing our nation to supply huge amounts of grain to the Soviet Union. Unlike previous agreements, this one contained a clause that prohibits the U.S. from terminating the arrangement. Therefore, America will continue to feed the Soviet Union even if Moscow invades more neighbors, repeats the Polish crackdown elsewhere, continues or steps up her persecution of Christians or Jews, shoots down more unarmed passenger planes, sends hit squads after the Pope or anyone else, and whatever else the Kremlin chooses to do. In 1983, a $25 billion foreign aid bill was passed by Congress only after language that prevented the aid from going to Communist governments was removed. *The original justification for foreign aid, of course, was that it would keep recipient nations from falling to Communism.* In 1983 under heavy pressure from the White House, Congress granted a massive increase of $8.4 billion in our nation's "contribution" to the International Monetary Fund, a major supplier of funds to Communist dictatorships. In 1982, U.S. Marines were directed to protect the Soviet-backed Palestine Liberation Organization as they were allowed to flee from Lebanon. In 1983, the Marines were again employed to rescue P.L.O leader Yasir Arafat and thousands of his followers. U.S. actions in and around Lebanon have resulted in strengthening pro-Soviet Syria, weakening pro-Western Isreal and driving Labanon into Syria's camp. So tell me, why are we spending billions upon billions to defend ourselves from this "threat" (real or imagined threat is not in the scope of this discussion) and turn right around and prop up the very deadbeat nations we're defending ourselves from? And all this from a supposed commie-hating president? Amazing! If Naziism had been opposed in a similar fashion, the Third Reich would still be running much of Europe. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Tom Buckley AT&T Information Systems ihnp4!drutx!trb