And what exactly do you suppose they based that knowledge on? Do you think they thought that while Governor of California he had invaded Oregon?

Iraq assaulted Iran in a power grab, and we supported Iraq's imperialism with weapons and money.

Iran defending itself from Iraq had no impact on our national security, and if Reagan was going to pick sides (he shouldn't have either way) sending weapons and funds to help Iran defend itself would've made at least some sense seeing as how it was the defender and not the aggressor.

__________________
"I believe that my next 100 days will be so successful, I will be able to complete them in 72 days. And on the 73rd day I will rest." -President Obama


"There is nothing I dread so much as a division of the Republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader and converting measures in opposition to each other." - John Adams

Do you want equality AND small government? Join the Democratic Freedom Caucus!

http://www.democraticfreedomcaucus.org/

Great speech.

Too bad when he became President his rhetoric didn't match his actions. Applies to most Republicans unfortunately. And it gives this misleading idea that Republicans stand for free markets and that free markets have failed. When everyone with any common sense knows that isn't the case.

You mean like Obama keeping many of the same Bush policies he said he would change?

oh wait...he is a democrat...so its ok.

__________________
I'm not a Republican because I grew up rich, but because I didn't want to spend the rest of my life poor, waiting for the government to rescue me.-[Mike Huckabee

Individual Patriot First ~Conservative Second ~ Republican Third

The last people to call others "teabaggers", were called Red Coats, and they got beat by the first American Patriots.

Do you even know what happened? Negoiations had been ongoing for months, and Carter finallt agreed to unfreeze Iranian funds in the US among other concessions, and they agreed to let the hostages go.

The only impact that Reagan being elected had is that the hostage takers were protesting U.S. and Carter's foreign policy, and Reagan was a fresh face, which might have made them cooperate more. But Reagan "being tough" as the cause of the crisis ending not only hasn't been substantiated, but it doesn't make sense in the context of actual events.

__________________
"I believe that my next 100 days will be so successful, I will be able to complete them in 72 days. And on the 73rd day I will rest." -President Obama


"There is nothing I dread so much as a division of the Republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader and converting measures in opposition to each other." - John Adams

Do you want equality AND small government? Join the Democratic Freedom Caucus!

http://www.democraticfreedomcaucus.org/

So your saying Reagan being elected had nothing to do with it...your 100% sure ?

__________________
I'm not a Republican because I grew up rich, but because I didn't want to spend the rest of my life poor, waiting for the government to rescue me.-[Mike Huckabee

Individual Patriot First ~Conservative Second ~ Republican Third

The last people to call others "teabaggers", were called Red Coats, and they got beat by the first American Patriots.

The only impact that Reagan being elected had is that the hostage takers were protesting U.S. and Carter's foreign policy, and Reagan was a fresh face, which might have made them cooperate more.

From my previous post.



And anyways, you still are keeping the topic off the fact that Reagan supported Hussein in his crusade for a power grab.

__________________
"I believe that my next 100 days will be so successful, I will be able to complete them in 72 days. And on the 73rd day I will rest." -President Obama


"There is nothing I dread so much as a division of the Republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader and converting measures in opposition to each other." - John Adams

Do you want equality AND small government? Join the Democratic Freedom Caucus!

http://www.democraticfreedomcaucus.org/

I've said before, we've been in a low intensity conflict with Iran since 1979. Supporting the enemy of your enemy in a proxy war is an appropriate tool of statecraft. They've used it, we've used it. It's used all over the world. It's what the cld war was.

Our stated goal then, and probably our covert goal now is a change of governments. The Iranian regime was and is our enemy.

BTW IMO our national security includes energy security. I've said before, if we had an autonomous energy policy, we'd be paying as much attention to the middle east, as we do to the various conflicts in Africa. But it's disingenuous on both sides to say we have no national interests in the middle east. We definitely do, and it's centered on their only significant export - oil.

Those who'd like us to resume an isolationist policy often also oppose exploiting domestic energy sources. You can't have one without the other, IMO.

I do agree with your assessment of oil independence.

I'm not an isolationist, but what occurs between those two countries are none of our concern. Fueling one side only escalates the war. Rooting for Iraq did not in any way help secure Middle Eastern oil.

Iran was our enemy because we made it so. We propped up unpopular dictators that the people rightfully overthrew. Iran didn't pose a security threat to us whatsoever, and there was no reason to take such an interventionist and hardline stance against them.

Unfortunately, we've kept their resentment levels up over the years to the point that they still hate us and would likely slip terrorist groups nuclear materials for the right price if they enrich to weapons-grade level. All because we couldn't stop intervening in affairs that were none of our concern.

Interventionism has massive and unpredictable consequences.

__________________
"I believe that my next 100 days will be so successful, I will be able to complete them in 72 days. And on the 73rd day I will rest." -President Obama


"There is nothing I dread so much as a division of the Republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader and converting measures in opposition to each other." - John Adams

Do you want equality AND small government? Join the Democratic Freedom Caucus!

http://www.democraticfreedomcaucus.org/

Our enemy is our enemy. They took hostages, invaded our embassy. You f**k around , you lay around. These are street rules.

That's a simplistic view. We ( actually Britain, with our assistance ) deposed a ruler the russians propped up, Mossadegh. The russians were looking for a warm water port and effective control over the persian gulf. We wren't going to let that happen, because of our strategic interests.

We are at war with Irans regime and have been since 79. We have a dog in this hunt, and national strategic interests in this region. We know how to solve it. Energy independence and this all goes away.

But wishing it were so doesn't change the truth on the ground.