So here's what i don't get. Reagan sells weapons TO THE IRANIANS and LIBERALS GET BLAMED FOR IT?

Question

no matter how much republicans want to try and rewrite history this is one fact that will always sit with reagan.

iran was never a freind. youre talking to someone who has a history degree with a minor in politics. please don't waste your time with the crap some of you wrote. it actually made me laugh. did you get your news from ann coultre?..no no..must have been fox news.

i can't stop laughing. i baited you..and you took it. thanks for showing your ignorance!

Answer 1

And he was only convicted in World Court of violating International law by attacking, or having attacked, Nicaragua!

Good thing their was a Bush around to pardon him!

Ollie was convicted and let off!

Reagan was a traitor, selling weapons to our enemy who had just held US hostages and blew up a Marine Barracks killing 242 military, almost all Marines. And he cut and ran!

Nicaragua v. United States
The Republic of Nicaragua v. The United States of America[ was a case heard in 1986 by the International Court of Justice which found that the United States had violated international law by supporting Contra guerrillas in their war against the Nicaraguan government and by mining Nicaragua's harbors. The Court ruled in Nicaragua's favor, but the United States refused to abide by the Court's decision, on the basis that the court erred in finding that it had jurisdiction to hear the case, The court stated that the United States had been involved in the "unlawful use of force".

The ruling
On June 27, 1986, the Court found that:

The United States of America, by training, arming, equipping, financing and supplying the Contra forces or otherwise encouraging, supporting and aiding military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua, has acted, against the Republic of Nicaragua, in breach of its obligation under customary international law not to intervene in the affairs of another State.
The United States of America, by certain attacks on Nicaraguan territory in 1983-1984, namely attacks on Puerto Sandino on September 13 and October 14 1983, an attack on Corinto on October 10 1983; an attack on Potosi Naval Base on January 4 and 5 1984, an attack on San Juan del Sur on March 7 1984; attacks on patrol boats at Puerto Sandino on March 28 and 30 1984; and an attack on San Juan del Norte on April 9 1984; and further by those acts of intervention referred to [above] which involve the use of force, has acted, against the Republic of Nicaragua, in breach of its obligation under customary international law not to use force against another State.
The United States of America, by directing or authorizing over Rights of Nicaraguan territory, and by the acts imputable to the United States referred to [above], has acted, against the Republic of Nicaragua, in breach of its obligation under customary international law not to violate the sovereignty of another State.
By laying mines in the internal or territorial waters of the Republic of Nicaragua during the first months of 1984, the United States of America has acted, against the Republic of Nicaragua, in breach of its obligations under customary international law not to use force against another State, not to intervene in its affairs, not to violate its sovereignty and not to interrupt peaceful maritime commerce.
The United States of America, by the attacks on Nicaraguan territory referred to [above], and by declaring a general embargo on trade with Nicaragua on May 1 1985, has acted in breach of its obligations under Article XIX of the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation between the Parties signed at Managua on January 21 1956.
The United States of America, by producing in 1983 a manual entitled 'Operaciones sicológicas en guerra de guerrillas' ("Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare")[12], and disseminating it to Contra forces, has encouraged the commission by them of acts contrary to general principles of humanitarian law; but [the Court] did not find a basis for concluding that any such acts which may have been committed were imputable to the United States of America as acts of the United States of America.

This was all clandestine and no one knew we were selling arms to Iran! Reagan denied it for years! How can you stop something you don't know about?

Answer 2

Yeah and we fought England to gain our independence and we fought our good friends Germany, Japan and Russia. And every "good" Muslim hated and oppressed the Palestinians until they had a conflict with the Israelis. And the Zulu nation was the greatest slave owning civilization next to only the Egyptians. You don't get geopolitics do you? Who's rewriting history? The entire middle east was armed against the true enemy of the time a superpower called the Soviet Union. The USSR, as demonstrated by the invasion of Afghanistan, intended to wipe all the little sheiks off the continent and procure all the oil reserves for the great Communist nation, so in an attempt to stop this landgrab without an escalation like WWII, we armed the guys who they were going to attack. Again I ask, who is rewriting history?

Yeah you really baited us there laughing boy. How much did you pay for your History degree? If it was more than 2 gum wrappers and a piece of string, you got ripped off.

Answer 3

October 8, 2003: Bush administration objected to a suggestion to have an self reliant regulator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac be an self reliant unit of Treasury, very akin to financial regulators housed interior the employer that oversee banks and thrifts. The Bush administration additionally objected to a suggestion to have the dep. of Housing and city progression have oversight over the agencies' business business enterprise activities. The independence provision has extensive help from committee Democrats and Republicans. The HUD provision became into pushed regularly by using Democrats yet were prevalent by using Oxley and Baker as a compromise mandatory to head the invoice forward. [Washington placed up, 10/8/03] March 22, 2007: Senator Dodd laid out how the Federal Reserve became into to blame for the "perfect typhoon" sweeping over American supplies proprietors. At a Banking committee listening to Dodd pronounced, "by using could of 2005, the clicking became into reporting that economists have been warning with regard to the hazards of those new mortgages. In June of that three hundred and sixty 5 days, Chairman Greenspan became into speaking approximately "froth" interior the loan marketplace and testified till now the Joint financial Committee that he became into stricken by using the surge in unique mortgages." [Senate Banking Committee Transcript, 3/22/07] August 6, 2007: At a White homestead morning press briefing, consistent with a question whether the housing marketplace is correcting or in disaster, President Bush says that the financial device is sweet: "[I]t seems we are headed for a delicate touchdown." [comments by using President Bush, 8/9/07]

Answer 4

So...... If I give something to someone who I believe is a friend to help protect them from a common enemy.........................and then
the "friend" turns against me 20 years latter.............. Is that my fault? Do Liberals get blamed for it?
I have never herd anyone blame Liberals for Regan selling weapons to Iran......That doesn't make any sense, it wasn't a bad thing. Iran was fighting against Russia, which was a MUCH larger threat to us.
I wish both sides would stop being so Hostile, and spinning the truth to capture the support of the ignorant.

Answer 5

Let's face it, republicans and their followers are dirty and corrupt, that's how they play the blame game, and they are able to do it because they have no moral conscience.

They are also able to market themselves to the Christians quite easily mainly because most neo-con christians don't know how to think for themselves. Republicans propogandize issues that they don't even stand for to keep the religious flock of sheep defending them, here are some examples.

Cheney, gay daughter who had a baby with her lover is against gay marriage

Ted Haggard - gay and a drug user

Foley- pedophile

Answer 6

he had to sell weapons to the Iranians, or he would have broke the deal he made with Iran to supply them with weapons for doing RayGun the favor of holding the hostages until after the elections. By republican logic RonOld RayGun was doing the honorable thing...keeping his word on his dirty deal.

also reference.... who was president September 2001 when the "liberals allowed terrorists to blow up the World Trade Center"

Republican logic...say the lie loudly, say it often, and the sheep will come to accept the lie as the unvarnished truth. Orwell lives

Answer 7

Yes, you're right, but no one remembers that. In a way, liberals deserve some blame, because no one really made any effort to seriously address the criminal acts of the Reagan administration. Yes they were brought to light in the end, but what was done about it? Nothing signficant. Did anyone even go to jail or get a fine? I don't even know! In any case Reagan himself got away with "I don't remember", to the shame of liberals of the time, and a reflection of the same general apathy we are struggling against now.

Answer 8

Sounds like you got it just fine. Just remember, if a republican did it, a democrat is sure to blame for not stopping it.

Answer 9

Funny? Seems to me that Oliver North was blamed for it. He's hardly a liberal.

Answer 10

"Iran was are friend at the time."

LMAO. Iran has not been our friend since the Shah got deposed. Wow...just wow.

Answer 11

A fact very conveniently forgotten, isn't it?
Another:
Republicans have stood by Bush in denouncing a timetable on Iraq, although their opposition to setting an end date to an ongoing war hasn't always been the case.
In 1993, Sen. John McCain led an effort to cut off funds immediately for military operations in Somalia after a firefight in Mogadishu killed 18 U.S. troops. The former prisoner of war in Vietnam brought a hush to the chamber floor when he asked what would happen if Congress failed to act and more Americans died.
"On whose hands rest the blood of American troops? Ask yourself this question," said McCain, R-Ariz.
Congress ultimately agreed to back President Clinton's request to give him until March 1994 to get troops out, with funding denied after that date. In 1999, Congress passed similar legislation prohibiting money spent to keep U.S. troops in Haiti after May 2000.
"When Americans are imperiled, ultimately the president has to bear that responsibility," Clinton said at the time of the Somalia vote.
Now, McCain — a GOP presidential contender for 2008 — says setting a date certain on the war in Iraq is like sending a "memo to our enemies to let them know when they can operate again."

Bloody hypocrites!