On Iran Contra

[DRoseDARs]

*whistles*
That is some crazy sh*t you've posted there, Ned.

[Ned]

I guess it depends on your point of view. To the left, Reagan is the ultimate evil, of course. Ditto Oliver North.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Even as a Reagan supporter, that's crazy **** you posted there, Ned. US given up fighting communism?! WTF? Carter, right before Reagan, began to fund Afghanistan's rebellion against the USSR among other Latin American adventures. Nixon and Ford were not shy about fighting communism. Neither was LBJ (remember Vietnam?) or JFK (Cuba/Vietnam). When did we stop fighting communism?

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Ned
The people who once lived under communism and who now live in free democracies do not see Reagan in the same light as the left. They see a man of courage and conviction to changed the world.

...and a guy who willingly and knowingly set out to violate the laws of the United States....laws which he'd sworn an oath to God to protect and defend.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
...and a guy who willingly and knowingly set out to violate the laws of the United States....laws which he'd sworn an oath to God to protect and defend.

Not to equate the two, but Lincoln during the Civil War "willingly and knowingly" set out to violate the laws of the United States... especially the 1st Amendment protections of free speech for which the Supreme Court slapped him down for after the war (and after his assasination, of course).

I can see the argument being that sometimes desperate times (Civil War, Proxy Wars against Communism) call for desperate measures in rare, limited cases.

[Elok]

I was under the impression that liberals view W as more of an "ultimate evil." Reagan, not so much.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Elok
I was under the impression that liberals view W as more of an "ultimate evil." Reagan, not so much.

The relationship between Reagan an Bush is best explained by Marx:

“History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.�

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I can see the argument being that sometimes desperate times (Civil War, Proxy Wars against Communism) call for desperate measures in rare, limited cases.

Proxy War in a banana republic = The American Civil War?!

I know you aren't advancing that position; I just can't believe anyone would.

Anyone other than Ned, that is...

[Zkribbler]

Dr. Martin Luther King and other civil rights workers made the point. They broke Jim Crow laws but willing went to jail. They worked to change the law, but they never attempted to evade punishment for any law that they did break.

When faced with an incorrect law, you must decide whether or not to follow it. But if you decide to break it, you must realize that you are indeed still violating a law and face punishment.

If you are committed to something enough to violate a law, you should be committed enough to accept the consequences.

[Elok]

BTW, I don't think we should be using the term "President Bush" for both of them. It gets confusing, and refering to the recent one as "W" isn't always ideal either. A single letter could be a typo. And "Dubya" just doesn't sound quite right as a formal title. I move that we refer to our current president as "The Shrubbery." It's how I like to think of him.

American Public: "No...you can't mean..."
Knights who say Neo-Con: "Yes...ANOTHER SHRUBBERY! For eight years this time!"

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
Proxy War in a banana republic = The American Civil War?!

I know you aren't advancing that position; I just can't believe anyone would.

Anyone other than Ned, that is...

Why does everything have to be absolute 'equal'. The argument is that desperate times calls for desperate measures. And for the record, I find Lincoln's total disregard for freedom of speech and throwing newspapermen in jail to be FAR more repugnant than funding the contras with arms sales to Iran. FAR more!

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Ecthy
Err.... just on a sidenote: were the hostages not freed 5 minutes after Reagan was inaugurated for his first term?

No. They were in the air and just left Iran airspace when Regain said "so help me god".

They timed it to the second, so that Jimmy Carter could not claim any victory. It was 12:01 and a few seconds.

A year or so after the event, an Air Force Officer was court marshal for saying he flew GHWB to Paris for talks.
Now this AF Officer was an SR-71 qualified pilot and all of a sudden he was not fit to be in the Air Force.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
PS Its a bit sad that oft cited (and widely repudiated) conspiracy theories such as the October Surprise still find a home in otherwise reasonable individuals.

Carter just had an interview last month in which has said he continue to believe Reagan did indeed arange the October Surprise to assure his election and that selling arms to Iran was Reagan's pay back to the mullahs. It isn't crazy and in all likelihood is exactly what happened.

Further more JFK's handling of the Cuban missile crisis was top notch. Under just about any other leader (certainly under someone like Nixon) it would have sparked WW3 but JFK found a face saving way to get the missiles out of Cuba, make the Soviets feel safer (by getting our missiles out of Turkey), and restarted the process of the two sides talking to each other. If he hadn't been shot then likely we would never have gotten so deeply involved in Vietnam (JFK and his main advisors didn't want the US to get in any deeper while Johnson's camp wanted to go whole hog) and the race issue would have likely been dealt with sooner without the race riots. In short he was on his way to being one of the best Presidents ever.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Joseph
No. They were in the air and just left
A year or so after the event, an Air Force Officer was court marshal for saying he flew GHWB to Paris for talks.
Now this AF Officer was an SR-71 qualified pilot and all of a sudden he was not fit to be in the Air Force.

Court marshalled? For what? Was this classified information? If so, I'm not surprised he was punished. You don't blab classified info...unless you think it's so important, you're willing to put yourself on the line.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui




Why does everything have to be absolute 'equal'. The argument is that desperate times calls for desperate measures. And for the record, I find Lincoln's total disregard for freedom of speech and throwing newspapermen in jail to be FAR more repugnant than funding the contras with arms sales to Iran. FAR more!

Not proportionately, it's not. Lincoln's disregard for the First Amendment was, as you rightly point out, a desparate measure in a desparate time -- indeed, the most desperate time in our nation's history. The outrages of Iran-Contra certainly also qualify as desperate measures, but where the hell was the "desperate time"? Ooo, a banana republic elected a socialist government...scary stuff, kids! Puh-leeze. It's not a valid comparison.