a to attempt to obtain concessions on limited arms. Under Reagan, virtually all aid was discontinued to Russia in the attempt of making it more difficult for the Soviet Union to continue increase its armament level. Reagan justified this change in strategy by pointing out the failure of the SALT II treaty proposed by his predecessor, Jimmy Carter. While the motives of the SALT II treaty were well-founded, Congress failed to ratify it.In addition to cutting off aid to deter the Soviets from continuing their arms build-up, Reagan began a large increase in military spending. Previous administrations had been decreasing spending on the military, citing a decline in hostile relations. Reagan began increasing funding for the military drastically during his administration. When he took office in January 1981, he was appalled at the fact that “American planes that couldn't fly and American ships that couldn't sail for lack of spare parts and trained personnel and insufficient fuel and ammunition for essential training.” Reagan justified this additional spending because he felt in the event of a crisis, we would be more able to respond. It is also important to note that Reagan justified the increase to match Soviet spending. In his speech on Defense and National Security in March of 1983, he notes “There was a time when we were able to offset superior Soviet numbers with higher quality, but today they are building weapons as sophisticated and modern as our own.” The increase in military spending and the focus on readiness was also to intimidate the Soviets into believing that the United States was a threat to its well-being. Perhaps the most interesting of these intimidation tactics used by the Reagan administration was the controversial SDI program. SDI, if funded, according to Reagan, would be able to stop a nuclear attack as it was happening. A “space-shield” of sorts (actually missiles fired ...
