Why did Reagan Veto Anti-Apartheid Act?

There were lots of countries abusing its people at the time. We did not have sanctions against every country because of it. Just because we did not provide sanctions to a country does not mean we like what is going on there.

 

Fighting communism is more important than supporting freedom and democracy: The story of America in the Cold War.

 

Your the one who's putting a "spin job" on it, Hillary Clinton's spin job to be precise(which by the way I found laughable the minute I heard it out of her mouth). If Syria felt compelled to make the deal because of the U.S threat(which doesn't make it any more lawful or dignified of our Nation State BTW, it just confirms that we're moving far to the military right, even for leftists) then why didn't Syria make that deal earlier?

The Ships were stationed there for about a week, there was the U.K vote amongst others, Syria had to recognize the war drum beating. What "diplomacy"? Obama went guns-ho first into Syria precisely because he had no interest or belief in diplomacy like you said.

(And like John Kerry said, before he had to cover up his pathetic legacy some more by saying it was 'diplomatic' to call it impossible ROFL).

The reality is, Syria made the deal when it first came apparent through the Russians, and the Obama WH which wanted this strike couldn't believe it.
Because of their diplomatic incompetence and geopolitical aggression(which didn't have the support of the vast majority of the U.S population), Putin and the Russians effectively painted our incompetent government into a corner.

They *HAD* to Whitewash it, to believe that their mind-numbing incompetence got them what they wanted. I'm sorry for you and them, but the time for Whitewashing is over:

If you threaten a country, any country whether it be with conventional methods of warfare, or nukes, or anything else, it's an act of war. And that nation would respond militarily to the threat. Had Obama acted even more unilaterally, had even one sub launched a missile, the deal doesn't come close to happening.

Putin saved us from a naked war of aggression, to which had it happened and even if we found Syria WMD'S, you'd sound even more and more like a Neo-Con and go "It was worth it, Obama was right!".

Even if Obama was right about Syria WMD capabilities, our credibility was shot. The U.N couldn't possibly support a nation aggressor that pretends to sit on the Security Council. It would've done major damage.

The weak spin job came from the 3 stooges, and it was 'funny' as much as it was scary. Because one sub missile could have substantially weakened the U.S over a non-existent threat.

And none of this is to suffice to say for the extremist terrorists to whom we were supporting. The attack alone would've done major damage. Our support for terrorists and extremists in the Middle Eastern areas has caused even more disapproval if possible.

But feel free to support our 3 stooges! I'm sure they'll eventually get better at this geopolitics thing, or at least we better hope so.

 

I am not defending Reagan's decision anymore than I am defending Nixon, Carter and Truman for holding the same exact position. The OP was trying to make it look like Reagan actively supported apartheid and hated black people for some reason. I was simply pointing out how stupid the the post is and how asinine the poster was for trying to selectively blame someone while conveniently ignoring that liberals did the same exact thing before. His tiny little mind never suggested that maybe he should look up how other presidents besides Reagan treated South Africa.

 

He was friends with Thatcher, who thought that Mandela was a terrorist. And both the US and the UK preferred to do business with SA than stand up against apartheid.

 

You flat out denying that Obama and the Whitehouse and the State Department didn't try to walk back the statement is the spin job here. Other posters have already linked to the Whitehouse and State Department denying taht Kerry's gaffe was their official policy and that Kerry was just "speaking off the cuff". Your lame, pathetic attempt at rewriting history is noted and you are obviously a paid staffer for the DNC. No one is that obtuse so you are clearly earing your pay right now by spreading lies.

I have proof you have nothing but asinine empty rhetoric and hyperbole. Everyone on this forum can see how stupid all your posts are.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/09/state-department-kerry-syria_n_3893213.html

LONDON, Sept 9 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry was making a rhetorical comment when he said on Monday that Syria's President Bashar al-Assad would not hand over his country's chemical weapons.

Kerry told a news briefing on Monday that Assad could avoid a military strike by turning over all his chemical weapons within a week but added that Assad was not about to do that.

"Secretary Kerry was making a rhetorical argument about the impossibility and unlikelihood of Assad turning over chemical weapons he has denied he used," a U.S. State Department spokeswoman said in an emailed statement.

 

Reagan considered the white government armed with nuclear weapons an important check against Soviet influence in Africa and ending apartheid was secondary to fighting the Cold War in Africa. Angola and Mozambique became independent from Portugal with new communist governments in 1975 and Cuban troops flooded into Angola in the 1970s and '80s. The African National Congress was fighting alongside the South African Communist Party and both Reagan and Thatcher feared a Communist takeover of South Africa in the 1980s and the ANC was allowed to rule South Africa only after the fall of the Soviet Union.

 

What world are you living in?

You seem to forget the red line before the red line. Putin and Assad also knew Obama had no support from the public or in congress for military action. Also, nobody was impressed by our threat of force. Putin and the Russians out hustled Obama plain and simple. But thanks for your fairytale version of what really happened.

 

Reagan was the beginning of the free market takeover of american government, the anti apartheid was a symbol of communism because they wanted to redistribute wealth to the south africans who were not equal in law.

 

Yeah, Putin and Assad "hustled" Obama alright...by caving into his demands (complete disarmament) 100%.

 

Umm, Assad is still in power and fighting Obama backed jihadist. It's a good thing that Assad is destroying his chemical weapons stockpile, and it's even better that Obama couldn't get us militarily involved in Syria. But the fact remains that there's over a million refuses, and syrian civilians getting killed by Assad backed forces and western backed jihadist. So nothing has really changed,except now Assad has room to beat back rebels, while Obama sits around and draws red lines. So exactly what was accomplished again?

 

Because he was a total idiot. He actually said in an interview that apartheid didn't really exist in South Africa and that there were no laws prohibiting black people from engaging in basic freedoms of civil society. Total fool, the man was.

 

Nonsense. Reagan was hardly a free marketeer. He was actually the biggest protectionist president post-ww2.

 

Don't you love how they use someone's death who isn't an American to put everyone in our country down?

Republicans, Cruz, Regan, etc

We the people in this country can't EVER do enough for these people though we have given Africa billions of our money

 

Criticizing Reagan is 'putting everyone down'? Jees are you in love with the guy or something? Would you prefer people forget about the despicable activities committed by people in the past?

Haven't heard someone say that

 

I think I named more than one person..
but whatever

 

In that case why are you commenting here when it is about Reagan not 'everyone'?

 

That was his excuse. Six years into his Administration, amidst growing pressure, there was any sign that Reagan was really interested in imposing sanctions, by Executive Order or any other means.

Congress obviously figured that out.

I voted for Reagan both times, but on this, as on AIDS and a couple of other things, I found him disgusting.

 

Again, there was already sanctions passed by Ronald Reagan. Look it up.

As I stated before, Reagan understood something that leftists never care about. Sanctions rarely harm the government in power. Instead it usually benefits them like the 'embargo' has Cuba. The Cuban government has used the sanctions that have yet to do any real harm, to excuse and deflect criticism from it's population. Blaming the US for all their woes.

The public tends to get mad at the country imposing the sanctions, rather than the government. Equally, if there are any real economic effects, it usually harms the impoverished people of the country the most, rather than the rich elite government. Reagan understood that. He was more concerned about passing sanctions least likely to harm the poor South African blacks, while appeasing the idiotic left.

The real purpose of the leftist sanctions, wasn't to help South African blacks. It would likely harm them the most, and the left didn't care then, and doesn't care now. Instead the real purpose was to beat Reagan over the head with it, which is exactly what we see the mindless lemmings of the left do today.

 

Reagan probably thought ANC and Mandela represented Communism, like Bill O'Reilly on Fox News does. LOL

 

False. Why make up garbage answers like that when the actual history is so readily available? Is Reagan's sorry hide really worth that?

Reagan was afraid of an African "domino effect" caused by Cuban troops in Angola and the problems in Namibia.

Carter had pledged to support majority rule in SA, and that probably helped Reagan take the opposite side.

So, Reagan gave the white SA apartheid government both military and economic aid and vetoed congress on their SA push and blocked the action against apartheid ordered by the UN. This in turn was used by the SA government to strengthen apartheid.

Desmond Tutu came to the US and declared Reagan's policy a total disaster, immoral and un-Christian. Even Republicans turned against Reagan, with the Republican majority senate voting overwhelmingly to condemn apartheid. They then overrode Reagan's veto and tossed his policy on South Africa.

Congressman Dick Cheney fought for apartheid through this - continuing his record of abysmal moral standards.

Republican congressman Lowell Weicker declared Reagan an irrelevancy to American ideals.

Other nations followed the congressional lead against the Reagan policy, including banning trade and investment in SA and even refusing to allow air travel with South Africa.


NOW - tell me again what you think Reagan understood.

 

Better than your complete lies.

Prove that.

Not true. Just flat out, not true.

None of this makes any difference to what I said. Nor do the statements make any difference.

Foreign businesses opened in South Africa, were some of the few places that poor blacks could get jobs without being discriminated against. The congressional sanctions would prevent those blacks from having jobs, by removing foriegn operated businesses.

I don't care what Cheney said or did. Nor do I care what Tutu said or did. Facts are the facts, not someone's opinion of the situation.

Reagan wrote in his own diary that he hated apartheid. Further he stated publicly...
"Apartheid is an affront to human rights and human dignity. Normal and friendly relations cannot exist between the United States and South Africa until it becomes a dead policy. Americans are of one mind and one heart on this issue."

However he also believed correctly that punitive sanctions were "declaring economic warfare on the people of South Africa." not the government. And he was, and is, right.

Hammering poor blacks with sanctions, does nothing, and did nothing, to end apartheid.

If anything, your posted proved everything I said in my original post.

 

Wasn't South Africa the sole supplier of some critical rare mineral needed for the space program at the time?

It was before my time but I think I read that somewhere along the way.

 

It is obvious you know nothing about Reagan. He is one of the most respected President we have had in many years. He is credited with helping to bring down the Soviet Union and freeing millions of East Europeans. There is a statue of him in Poland and England.

 

Sure. Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden both loved him.