Reagan, Bush, and those pesky terrorists.

[hardheadjarhead]

When asked about the 9-11 Commission's debunking of the Iraq-Al Qaeda connection, President Bush had this to say as to why the U.S. invaded Iraq:

``Saddam Hussein was a threat. He was a threat because he had used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. He was a threat because he was a sworn enemy of the United States of America, just like al- Qaeda. He was a threat because he had terrorist connections.''

``The world is better off and America is more secure without Saddam Hussein in power."

1. Saddam alleged use of WMD's on his own people took place during the Reagan administration. No invasion of Iraq took place at that time.

2. Saddam's WMD program was developed with the help of the U.S., Italy, and Great Britain. Even hawkis conservative William Safire condemned this in a Dec. 7, 1992 article in the NYT. The President when these weapons were being developed? Ronald Reagan.

3. Iran was described as a terrorist state by Ronald Reagan in a speech in 1985. Shortly after that speech he started selling arms to them illegally, in violation of the Congressional Boland amendment (which he signed) and UN sanctions.

4. Iran, like North Korea, was a sworn enemy of the United States at that time.


So...in analyzing this, we find Ronald Reagan provided the gas that gassed the Kurds. He had terrorist connections and dealt with the government that was responsible for the murder of 241 American Marines. He sold arms to this terrorist government in secret.

Reagan was a threat. We should have invaded the White House in 1990.

Regards,

Steve

 

[Cruentus]

Reagan was a threat. We should have invaded the White House in 1990.

Regards,

Steve

So...I wonder if the euphoric, misplaced nestalgia has worn off yet since the funeral, and if people are willing to logically evaluate his Presidency once again? Perhaps we'll see.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Reagan was a threat. We should have invaded the White House in 1990.

lol - but point taken!

I hope we can see more of this kind of "summary" or evaluation of the Reagan presidency more widely. I'm quite tired of looking back on the "glory days" that weren't that glorious (in politics) to begin with, and were, in fact, downright lousy.

 

[Phoenix44]

I think we should invade the White House in 2004.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

When I think of all the reasons we invaded Iraq...I wonder WHEN we suddenly came up with this new criteria for invasion of a country.

They violated UN resolutions? So did we with Iran-Contra. Violations of UN resolutions is a pretty common thing, and we've never used it as a pretext for invasion before...at least I don't believe we have.

They were a sworn enemy of the United States? China has suggested she'd nuke Los Angeles (Condi Rice talked them her of it). North Korea routinely threatens the U.S. imperialistic aggressors and every so often kills an American or hijacks one of our ships. When are we going to invade them?

Libya, Sudan, Syria...all have harbored terrorists. Saudi Arabia supports them...or did until we pressured them. Are we going to invade the Phillipines?

For the record: In the early days I supported the war. As it wore on, and we started to learn that maybe the administration's assessment wasn't all that it SHOULD have been, I got increasingly disenchanted.

Apparently this attitude isn't purely "liberal". On the conservative side:

An Army War College study done before the war predicted the current outcome and the difficulties we're encountering. They recommended far more troops than the 130,000 or so we've used in attempting pacification. Had these officers doing the study been given a crystal ball they wouldn't have gotten any more accurate. Well...they're Army. Whaddya expect? Go Navy.

Tucker Carlson sheepishly admits error in trusting the government. Anybody that wears a bow tie on national television has to be a fairy and an enemy of the United States.

Bill O'Reilly apologizes to his listeners for accepting the WMD story. Well, he's a pinko and probably dates Carlson.

Pat Buchanen says on national television three weeks ago "I really have no idea why we're there." Communist traitor.

Retired Marine General Anthony Zinni and author Tom Clancy (ever heard of him?) come out against the war in their book "Battle Ready." Clancy says there was no casus belli for the war. What a bleeding heart!!!

Sun Times Columnist Bob Novak doesn't hesitate to show the cracks in the Republican base, claiming in a May 20 article that twenty percent of Republicans are pulling their support for Bush because of the war and his spending. Among them are American Conservative Union Vice Chairman Don Devine. Those disloyal wretches!!!

27 former diplomats...many of them appointed by Republicans, have come out against the Bush administration stating that Bush's team is unable in "style or substance" to handle the role of Global leadership.

Among them are retired Marine General Joe Hoar, who was appointed by G.H.W. Bush to head up forces in the Middle East, and retired Admiral Bill Crowe, Jr., who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Reagan. One signer, Tony McPeak, is a former Air Force Chief of Staff and worked on Republican Bob Dole's campaign. He joined "Veterans for Bush" in 2000.

The participants also include a pair of former ambassadors to the Soviet Union, two former ambassadors to Israel, two former ambassadors to Pakistan and a former director of the CIA.

Where in the HECK is Joe McCarthy when you need him? We need to clean house here.

The less famous Republicans I know...my wife and her family...are quietly turning away from the party this year. All educators, they feel that several million children have been "left behind." I wish I could say they were wrong.

I can't.




Regards,


Steve

 

[hardheadjarhead]

I think we should invade the White House in 2004.

I'm betting on it. I'm going to be richer come December.


Regards,

Steve

 

[michaeledward]

Watch the 'Echo Chamber' in the Right Wing Media (FOX News, Talk Radio, NY Post) try and convince us that the real problem with the invasion of Iraq, and its occupation is the lack of Weapons of Mass Destruction. O'Reilly was spinning this fast and hard yesterday in his No-Spin zone.

It is my opinion that if they can get the real media to buy into the fact the the attrocity of the war was the lack of WMD, all of the blame can be placed neatly at George 'It's a Slam Dunk' Tenet, paving the way for their rabid support of GWB.

The local right wing nutcase, Jay Severin, swore UP and DOWN and LEFT and RIGHT that he would not vote for George Bush over a variety of issues during the last year or two (Iraq, Immigration and others). Well, on Friday last, he put on his Hypocracy suit; now he is saying he was being self indulgent and he does intend to support and vote for George W.

In my opinion, that represents a huge lack of integrity (Bill Bennet anyone?) by a guy who constantly proclaims his integrity.

I certainly did not expect anything more.

The truly scary thing ... it seems that even now, a sizeable minority of the US Populace supports this administration ... I don't get it.

Mike