Reagan's Foreign Policy Was Ultimately Bad, Both for Others and the United States

My space is limited, so I will leave pleasantries aside. Having read my opponent's specific argument, I still maintain the Con position. The wiki my opponent provides as a definition of the Reagan doctrine is a good, albeit rough, assessment of his foreign policy. I will accept the Reagan doctrine as a foreign policy move from detainment to rollback concerning the Soviet Union, and open support for third world countries opposing USSR backed governments through proxy wars. I must deal with my opponent's most egregious error first. "[W]hen the Soviet Union fell, Reagan should have withdrawn all American troops from all around the world (even if gradually) and brought them home." I must remind my opponent that the Soviet Union did not fall until 1991. [1] Ronald Reagan was not President of the United States in 1991. [2] Now my opponent's second error, he points out one of the main justifications the Saudi terrorists used for attacking the U.S. was the bases located in Saudi Arabia. Although the US operated a small training mission in Saudi Arabia since the 1950's, the troop presence was established in the 1990's during the Gulf War era, also not on Reagan's watch. [3] "During the Gulf War, Osama bin Laden opposed the US-Saudi alliance because King Fahd invited the United States and its allies to station forces in Saudi Arabia. The presence of American soldiers in Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of the Prophet Muhammad with the holy cities of Mecca and Medina enraged bin Laden as well as other Arabs." [4],[5]. Bin Laden was angered at the US protective forces in Saudi Arabia and the fact Saudi officials rejected his help. "Arriving with maps and many diagrams, Mr. bin Laden told Prince Sultan that the kingdom could avoid the indignity of allowing an army of American unbelievers to enter the kingdom, to repel Iraq from Kuwait. He could lead the fight himself, he said, at the head of an group of former mujahedeen that he said could number 100,000 men." [6] I ask my opponent to list the US Military Bases located in Saudi Arabia from 1980-1988. Next, my opponent focuses on Afghanistan to support his position. He claims, with accuracy, the U.S. assisted the mujahideen as part of Reagan's rollback policy. I agree, but support was given long before Reagan became President. The history of US, Soviet and world wide intervention in Afghanistan dates back to the 1950's. [7] at 12-13. Worldwide intervention in Afghanistan predated Reagan, but my opponent wishes to lay the formation of the Taliban at, then, President Reagan's feet. This proposition is an error. Fundamentalist Islamic factions within the country opposed leftist backed leadership long before Reagan ever entered the picture. [7] see, generally, chapter 1; [8] at 5. Please note, the mujahideen were supported by many nations from Saudi Arabia to China. In addition, President Carter started the policy of aiding the Afghani rebels prior to the Reagan Presidency. When the Soviet occupation ended, what did Reagan do? Nothing, Reagan was not President. George H.W. Bush was president. He announced the Soviet retreat as a major victory in the Cold War, and in 1992, the U.S. and the USSR abandoned armament policies in the country. [8] The anger at the U.S. appears to stem from the US abandonment of Afghanistan prior to the establishment of a central government. "By walking away from Afghanistan as early as it did, the USA faced within a few years dead diplomats, destroyed embassies, bombs in New York and cheap heroin on its streets, as Afghanistan became a sanctuary for international terrorism and the drugs mafia. Afghans today remain deeply bitter about their abandonment by the USA, for whom they fought the Cold War" [7] at 209. Reagan neither started the aid to Afghanistan, nor withdrew the troops from the area. His policy of continued aid was necessary as abandonment amidst the turmoil in Afghanistan, enacted by his successor, became the focus of a strong national security risk. I agree the US is now fighting some of the very people the CIA helped train, but the weapons appear to be from recent arms sales, not the Soviet-Afghan war. One of the big concerns was the stinger missiles, of which 300 were unaccounted for in 1993. Milt Bearden, a retired senior C.I.A. official told the Lede, "they are probably just too old to work properly by now. ‘The last ones were delivered in 1988, and its [sic] a pretty complex system — a lot of things can go funky' in 21 years." [9] I ask my opponent to provide specific examples concerning Latin America as each has unique features and I do not have the space to address all of them. I generally present a positive argument even when I take the Con position, but my opponent has failed to establish a prima facie case for his position due to several foundational mistakes; therefore, I see no need to do so at this point. Sources in Comments Section.