Why is Reagan not held accountable by history ...?

Question

for selling arms to the Iranians (who had just released 52 American diplomats held for 444 days).

I really want to know. Have we forgotten Iran-Contra?

Let's be sure to add they were secret arms deals

bildy-moon: are you on oxycontin, man? that's just nonsense!

Answer 1

It's funny how republicans talk about what a liar Clinton was because of his sexual indiscretions. I don't condone adultery, but it didn't hurt anyone except his family, and no one died. Infidelity is a common fact of life - immoral arms dealing isn't.

Why are people who are so quick to criticise Clinton so quick to forgive Reagan?

Answer 2

Reagan is held accountable for Iran-Contra. Lets see, Carter began secretly selling arms to Iranian moderates in hopes that they would stage a coup against the fundamentalist government and America hostages would be released. Reagan continued the arms sales to these same moderates in hopes of freeing more hostages being held in Lebanon.
Meanwhile, the Democrat controlled congress decided that genocide in Nicaragua was A-Okay and voted not to fund arming the Contras who were being slaughtered by the Sandanistas because they were speaking out in favor of democracy for Nicaragua. Reagan decided to let the NSA, who was not covered under the congressional ban to use the funds they received from the arms sales or Iranian moderates to give the Contras a fighting chance. We can all agree that this should have all been out in the open. The American public would have been behind him all the way if it had. But, seeing that the hostage were released from Lebanon and the slaughter of Contras had stopped, I will not only hold Reagan accountable, but be ever thankful for his courage and conviction.

Answer 3

Mr. Brendan,

Blind people see what they want to see. Deaf people hear what they choose to hear.

History is written by the victors, not the losers.

For you and your bad of cutthroat democrat ideologues, why don't you all WRITE DOWN the objective standards by which ALL Presidents should be measured? Then we can all, equally, judge whether or not a President is worthy of praise or prosecution.

This is the fundamental flaw in your and other's thinking: Apply the same standard to your Democratic Presidents as you do to Republicans and see how they stack up.

Run the list and I will respond to how you rate: FDR, Truman, JFK (think nuclear war there), Johnson (Viet Nam), Carter, and of course Willy.

Go ahead, take the challenge!

The fact is all Presidents do good and evil.

I dare any of you to tell me that YOU wouldn't sell weapons to Iranians to give freedom to 52 American men and women held captive in a hostile country for 400+ days? You think the guns were more important than returning them to the US.

It is truly sickening that you attack the electorate system of the US when you lose and celebrate it when you win. You have no integrity if you do that. It is a binary (look it up) thing. You either support the constitution and its means all the time or you don't.

Where do you stand?

Answer 4

HAHAHA...Man that takes me back....

I remember Reagan's "I'm a Contra too"....and the joke about Ollie North being America's "three star Colonel" for shuffling paperwork on three continents. Then to top it off, the only thing
they could convict him of was the security fence he put up around his house with the missile money.
I wonder how many "War Stories" viewers have a clue that he
is a convicted Felon?

I guess Reagan was better at getting rid of evidence than Nixon.

Answer 5

Reagan negotioated, and traded with terrorists.

Conservatives don't want to remember it.

Iran contra was a dark point in our nations history. Selling arms to Iran for hostages, then using the profits to give to the contras. It was a illegal, ran by the CIA. Very sad.

Answer 6

Iran contra was a blip. Reagan won the cold war. Not a bad legacy.

Answer 7

Most presidents aren't. In fact, when you browse through the an American high-school history text book, you'll have a hard time finding anything negative about those people we Americans consider heroes.

Answer 8

Now that Sadam is lengthy gone, who is going to be next to pay for the crimes committed in Iraq? i imagine Bush and Blair must be the subsequent to be hanged or imprison for existence for sending their troops to wrestle innocuous Iraqis civilians. besides to, some estimates are that 500,000 Iraqis civilians were killed through coalition infantrymen. in the route of abode 30,000 US infantrymen were critically injured (incapacitated to do any artwork for existence), and over 3,000 were killed. To make lengthy tale short the form is an similar with the coalition troops. Sadam develop into finished because US accused him of killing 100 twenty 5 civilians 2 many years in the past. that's all about civilians isn't it

Answer 9

He tried to clean up what Carter had done. The sales were started by Carter. Regan gained power the week before the Hostages were released. He stopped some of the sale. Sorry but he did not have much to do with that. So blame who is actually responsible. Carter.

Answer 10

because it was seen as diplomacy, and avoiding a war, while the USSR was still in power. But it only helped set up future wars.