outsidethebox wrote:
And Robert, you may be correct but is it is interesting how the Reagan fans are able to block out the whole Iran Contra thing-which turns the entire "I am for the people" mantra on its head and and defines "farce" and "hypocrisy" and obliterates his anti-government facade????
Iran contra was in fact well within the scope of the federal government to protect and defend the interests of the United States. Iran was under the control (and still is) of the religious oligarchy that deposed the Shah during the weak Carter administration. The covert support of anti-ayatollah factions was as necessary then as it is today, but no, today the government is ignoring their nuclear ambitions and throwing Israel to the wolves. The operations in Nicaragua were also necessary to stem the tide of communism pushing through south and central america. Take a look at what is happening in Venezuala today, if the US does not take a stand for liberty, freedom who will?? Obama is weaker than even Clinton on foreign policy, and probably as weak as Carter.
The only thing on foreign policy I disagreed with Reagan on is the pull out from Lebanon after the attack on the marines base there, that should have been met with ferocious retaliation, but given the times when the middle east was the surrogate battleground between the USA and the USSR such a response could have led to nuclear war, and I think Reagan's long game was, as he stated, to win the cold war, which he did through military and financial strength, not asking if there was something we could do so as not to hurt the russians feelings!