I'm sorry...he called it "redeployment" wink wink.
2007-03-11 12:26:19 · 11 answers · asked by Villain 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
My facts are right. There were no funds cut, or any of that. Reagan moved the Marines out of there.
2007-03-11 12:49:47 · update #1
Actually, Reagan did a lot of other retarded crap too. When I mention Beirut to neocons and how Reagan never retaliated against the Iranians for backing the barracks bombing, they get this glassy eyed look, that starts when you say 'remember when Reagan got 240 Marines killed...?' they just loose all normal conciousness when you finish saying Reagan and they just wander off blindly.
2007-03-11 12:34:15 · answer #1 · answered by ProLife Liberal 5 · 4⤊ 4⤋
SFAIK the US went there as a part of a multinational peacekeeping force. After the US and French compounds were attacked (by the very people they were protecting) all the other nations decided to pull out. The option was to stay alone, facing a hostile Syria, PLO, Hamas etc, all enjoying full support and unrestricted weapon supplies from the USSR- while at the same time being subject to UN restrictions...
A recipe for disaster. Ducking out was a bitter pill to swallow, but nevertheless the only sensible move in the circumstances.
2007-03-11 12:35:53 · answer #2 · answered by cp_scipiom 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
The historic previous of genuine conservatives is so a lot more suitable isolationist than it truly is now. This "u . s . construction" is an particularly Liberal theory. and also you're properly desirable. Reagan did "shrink and run" by technique of the right's new definition.
2016-12-01 20:42:48 · answer #3 · answered by sarro 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the Iran Contra scandal is also still plaguing the Reagan administration and the former Bush VP,, still the best Republicans can come up with since Lincoln,,,
History will judge him more harshly due to the Bush administration blunders, lies and failures,,, and yet,,,
George W. likes to compare himself to FDR and,, Condi even compared the war in Iraq to WW-ll,,, their pitifully under educated,,, the whole GOP bunch.
I noticed that Republicans are blaming Democrats for the Reagan blunders too,, just proves the point of their lack of responsibility for anything.
2007-03-11 12:49:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
That cut and run is Republican silly favorite word. I just ignore them because they can't get through their hard heads they lost both the house and Senate and will lose the White House. Their still think their in control, just ignore them their minds are a complete blank the whole caboodle,
2007-03-11 12:33:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 4⤋
Got better question why did the U.S. Government "cut and run"
on it's people?
2007-03-11 12:47:06 · answer #6 · answered by ? 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Hahaha congress made him do it haha. ronny alzheimer was cic, he could do what he wanted
He withdrew troops because a lebanese suicide bomber blew up a barracks full of marines.
The suicide bomber was doubtably p!ssed at U.S. tactics like having the uss new jersey lob volkswagen-sized bombs into civilian neighborhoods or blowing up buildings. rrr's best boy ollie admitted he helped blow up a hotel because a preacher he didn't like might be there.
The preacher wasn't. Nealy 100 civilians died.
2007-03-11 12:39:09 · answer #7 · answered by AlphaMale 2 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Nice try, but you can't even spell Lebanon correctly.
As it was, it had been a multi-national force deployed during Lebanon's civil war. The bombing of the barracks killed hundreds, mostly US Marines and ended the multi-national presence there.
Stick to the facts.
2007-03-11 12:40:26 · answer #8 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 4⤊ 5⤋
So I take it, as a cut and run lib yourself, that you supported and voted for Regan both times? Pat yourself on the back, fundy neocon
2007-03-11 12:29:52 · answer #9 · answered by Savage Limbaugh 1 · 4⤊ 4⤋
He was a shrewd man and did not want any more of our troops killed in a useless quagmire.
2007-03-11 12:33:14 · answer #10 · answered by naseldrip 4 · 6⤊ 3⤋