Why did Reagan sell weapons to Iran?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by RtWngaFraud, May 25, 2012.

  1. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm curious why the right hails Reagan as this great -something-. Why is that? If Obama sold weapons to Iran, you right wingers would be losing your minds.
     
  2. Bluespade

    Bluespade Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    15,669
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why did Reagan sale weapons to Iran?

    To free hostages in Lebanon.

    Anymore stupid questions?
     
  3. SiliconMagician

    SiliconMagician Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,921
    Likes Received:
    446
    Trophy Points:
    0
    and to provide funds to fight communists in central America.

    Don't bother arguing. To the leftwing the Soviet Union was, and Communism is.. a force for good in the world and the Cold War was just Americans picking on an innocent nascent socialism.
     
  4. Bluespade

    Bluespade Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    15,669
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Too say the least, mr. Fraud is historically illiterate. There was never any proven link between Reagan himself, and the sale of weapons to Iran.

    How embarrassing.
     
  5. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That was illegal though, wasn't it? Why didn't he go to jail?
     
  6. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0


    Oh...you have selective memory. Reagan WAS responsible. He even gave an explanation as to why he did it. Fact was...it was illegal and no President is above the law. The man was a lawbreaker and is as responsible for Iran's situation today as Rumsfeld was for Iraq's weapon deals with Saddam.
     
  7. Bluespade

    Bluespade Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    15,669
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    While President Ronald Reagan was a supporter of the Contra cause,[6] no conclusive evidence has been found showing that he authorized the diversion of the money raised by the Iranian arms sales to the Contras.[2][3][7] To this day, it is unclear exactly what Reagan knew and when, and whether the arms sales were motivated by his desire to save the U.S. hostages.[8] After the weapon sales were revealed in November 1986, Reagan appeared on national television and stated that the weapons transfers had indeed occurred, but that the United States did not trade arms for hostages.[9] The investigation was impeded when large volumes of documents relating to the scandal were destroyed or withheld from investigators by Reagan administration officials.[10] On March 4, 1987, Reagan returned to the airwaves in a nationally televised address, taking full responsibility for any actions that he was unaware of, and admitting that "what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages."[11]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Contra_affair

    Anymore question?
     
  8. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes...why was he allowed to break the law?
     
  9. peoplevsmedia

    peoplevsmedia Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    6,765
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    0
    First I would like some straight answers
     
  10. Bluespade

    Bluespade Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    15,669
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Once again, there was no direct link between Regan and the sale of weapons too Iran. That's the finding a congressional commission. So, you're pretty much wrong, again.
     
  11. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,883
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    They had no direct evidence that Reagan broke the law. While authorities were in Col. North's office looking for evidence, he and his secretary was grinding it up in a shredder.


    10, 1987

    Sign In to E-Mail
    Print

    Lieut. Col. Oliver L. North testified today that he continued to shred documents in his office one morning last November while Justice Department officials conducting a preliminary investigation for President Reagan worked 10 feet away reviewing other files.

    ''They were working on their project,'' Colonel North said with a half smile under questioning from Arthur L. Liman, the Senate counsel cross-examining Colonel North. ''I was working on mine.''

    This latest revelation about the colonel's shredding raised further doubts about the competence of the Justice Department's preliminary inquiry and led some lawmakers to speculate that the department might have been part of an effort to hide the facts. Disavowal by Department

    A Justice Department spokesman said two of the investigators, questioned about Colonel North's assertion today, said that ''it was their firm recollection that at no time when they were there did Colonel North shred documents or even turn on a shredding machine.'' Colonel North also gave the Congressional committees investigating the Iran-contra affair the most direct testimony to date that William J. Casey, the former Director of Central Intelligence, had masterminded a concerted effort to cover up the Administration's efforts to help the rebels in Nicaragua. [ Excerpts, pages A8 and A9. ] Intended as the Scapegoat Throughout his three days of testimony, the colonel has insisted that the secret operations he ran out of the White House were conducted under orders principally from the two national security advisers for whom he worked, Robert C. McFarlane and Rear Adm. John M. Poindexter, and from Mr. Casey. Today, he asserted repeatedly that they had a long-standing plan for him to be the scapegoat if the secret activities were revealed.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/10/w...e-presence-justice.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
     
  12. Zosiasmom

    Zosiasmom New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    18,517
    Likes Received:
    250
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Reagan was the Commander in Chief. It happened on his watch involving military personnel. Personally, I think it was old Herb. He was once a spook and this seems like a CIA type of maneuver.
     
  13. Daggdag

    Daggdag Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    15,668
    Likes Received:
    1,957
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Reagan sold weapons to Iran to help raise money to give to the Contras. it was high treason and Reagan would have been impeached and executed if not for Oliver North taking the blame.
     
  14. Daybreaker

    Daybreaker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    17,158
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Another president probably wouldn't have gotten away with it. But Reagan was sort of beloved, even by the people that strongly disagreed with him.
     
  15. jmpet

    jmpet New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3,807
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War by outspending Russia, which was darn-near broke from decades of keeping up with the USA. His great accomplishment was seeing this and acting on it at just the right time to tear down walls. This is why Reagan should be on the quarter. Why did he sell/give weapons to Iran? See above!
     
  16. Daggdag

    Daggdag Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    15,668
    Likes Received:
    1,957
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The cold war ended because the USSR fell. No other reason. Reagan was not even president at the time.
     
  17. Zosiasmom

    Zosiasmom New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    18,517
    Likes Received:
    250
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Chernobyl had as much to do with the fall of the Soviet Empire as us "outspending" them. It doesn't matter anyway. If you break the law you should be held accountable. When you are President you must be held to the same standards as everyone else.
     
  18. Pollycy

    Pollycy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    29,922
    Likes Received:
    14,183
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Strange that this thread wasn't deleted as "flamebait". Guess that all depends on whose "bait" is being "flamed".... :roll:

    Anyway, since we're going back in history decades, I'll ask you a rejoinder question: I'm curious why the Left hails Frankie Roosevelt as this great -something-. Why is that? FDR declared a total oil embargo against the Japanese when we were at complete PEACE with them -- forcing them to attack us so that they could still get access to the oil that they had to have (or die). Frankie had been conspiring with Churchill for two years, trying to find a way to drag the US, kicking and screaming, into the British war with the Axis countries. Why did Frankie do this when the American people clearly did not want to go into another world war?

    The lesson: one man's hero is another man's villain... except that it is a proven fact that Franklin Delano Roosevelt DID declare a total oil embargo against the government of Japan. Reagan was never conclusively found to be guilty of any direct involvement in "Iran-Contra"....:heartbreaker: The difference? FDR's stunt got hundreds of thousands of American soldiers killed!
     
  19. Daybreaker

    Daybreaker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    17,158
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I've always felt that if something is really worth doing, even though it's illegal, then you shouldn't complain too much when it comes to doing the time. Otherwise, you're saying that it was only worth it so long as it was someone else paying the price.

    If Reagan was really the champion of "personal responsibility" that his followers like to think of him as, then he should have manned up and faced the music. Maybe he tells the truth and we decide, as a people, to let him get away with it. But to just pretend he couldn't remember, that was kind of insulting to all of us.
     
  20. Zosiasmom

    Zosiasmom New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    18,517
    Likes Received:
    250
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Exactly!!! Like that mom who shot the pedophile outside the courthouse...or that father in the airport who shot his daughter's murderer...they knew they were going to jail, and had accepted it.

    Reagan is Jesus Christ to a lot of people, so they will refuse to see him as a human person. You mention anything about his moral ambiguity and it's flamebait and that's kind of sad.
     
  21. dla

    dla New Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So just to be clear - do you know what the "law" was that Reagan supposedly broke? Specifically?

    I remember the televised Iran-Contra hearings. I even remember Joe Biden looking like a total moron when Ollie North schooled him.

    Anyways, I think it is pretty important to nail down just exactly what was illegal about the Reagan administration's activities.

    And when you are done with that, answer this: are El-Salvador and Nicaragua better off today because of the funding of the Contras?


    Obama in 2012? Seriously? - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=a4nvhAZ0vr0
     
  22. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oh Lord, regulate your nationalism and patriotism already you overgrown metaphor.
     
  23. SiliconMagician

    SiliconMagician Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,921
    Likes Received:
    446
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No. Around here in this area Ollie North is a hero who helped defeat communism in the Western Hemisphere.
     
  24. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    JumpersIntoSheeplePit.jpg

    I've always meant to ask you - what type of history do you read? I mean, is it just the regurgitated K-12 stuff that paints America in favorable light, or what?
     
  25. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,883
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No he wasn't President then, but he was one of several major factors in bringing the Soviet Union down. He bled them dry trying to keep up with Reagan's military spending. Then Reagan made a deal with Saudi Arabia to cut the price of oil to about $15.00 a barrel, knowing oil was the Soviet's biggest export. The Soviet's refused to drop their prices that much and just held it. That only hurt them more. I also think it helped that Gorbachev trusted Reagan and felt that Reagan all but assured him that America was not an aggressor nation. I think without that feeling, the Soviets would have tried to hold the nation together, as hard as would have been.
     

Share This Page