Phil . # . 2/2

Was it 'threat of force' which led to the US prevailing over the USSR? I argue not.

I saw something which made me think c1990s. I'm an earlier Tom Clancy fan. One book ('Executive Orders' I think) was dedicated to "Ronald Wilson Reagan - the man who won the war". Now many, those of the left especially, would never give the Gipper credit for anything. That quote made me think.

c1980s, the Cold War was no worse, arguably better than at previous times - the 60s eg. Ronnie had floated the concept of SDI however.

Now the US spends/spent ~4% of GDP on defence. The USSR on the other hand spent 30% of their GDP on defence. It was a poker game, the US effectively said something like "I'll see your $100 billion and triple the bet". The Soviets had no choice but to try and match the technology, and it bankrupted them, and arguably demoralised them as well. They crashed.

So arguably, it was capitalism's efficient economy that saw them off, not threat of force.