WIll we believe him again? by SignyM

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

WIll we believe him again?

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Sunday, August 21, 2005 22:56
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 7861
PAGE 3 of 3

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 7:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
I remember. I just found it more than a little ironic that you'd admit that such a thing had ever happened in light of your recent statements regarding US mistakes.

But playing it down to North being just a 'rogue' NSC guy is altering the truth just a bit, don't you think?

Iran-Contra hawk Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 7:32 AM

SERGEANTX

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
But playing it down to North being just a 'rogue' NSC guy is altering the truth just a bit, don't you think?

Iran-Contra hawk Chrisisall

I dunno, not as long as I can refer to Bush as a 'rogue president guy'

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 7:41 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by lynchaj:

LtCol North was a rogue NSC officer conducting illegal trade with Iran (F-14 & Hawk air defense parts) in exchange for help with US hostages held in Lebanon. Used the proceeds to fund the Contras in Nicaragua.

Congress was really ticked off. LtCol North broke the law and was invited to leave the military permanently.

One issue was the sale of parts. He sold them to Isreal and Isreal sold them to Iran. Why? Because it was illegal for the US to sell them to Iran. He was not charged or convicted with any crime relating to the sale. On a side note a number of hostages were released.

The other issue was the Contra rebels in Nicaraugua. Congress had shut off direct American aid. The CIA and NSC started an effort to fill the gap using private funds, most of which were provided directly from the personal accounts of King Faud of Saudi Arabia, who was a close personal friend of Ronald Reagan and dedicated to Reagan's effort to defeat global communism. When the Isreali arms dealers sold the parts to Iran they made a small profit. Rather then profit from the sale of weapons and subsequent release of hostages they donated the money to the private funds supporting the Contra rebels. This was the "diversion". Col. North was not charged with any crime relating to this either.

All this together became the Iran-Contra affair which was essentially an effort to trade arms for hostages and divert the proceeds to fund the Contras in defiance of Congress's Bolan Amendments. It was also hoped to begin the process of reopening the door to Iran so that the US could support moderate forces that existed in certain factions, like the Iranian Army for example. None of the acts in themselves was illegal.

North was charged with several counts of either contempt of Congress or lying under oath or both. He was convicted of one charge and that conviction overturned. North pointed out, with evidence, that while information on the Contras was withheld, it was due to the strange way that such information presented to certain Democratic congress persons kept winding up in the hands of the Nicaurauguan Commie government at the cost of the lives of numerous freedom fighters and some American agents.

Feels good to say "Commie" again.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 8:01 AM

CHRISISALL

Wow, that was good. Attention to detail, I'm impressed.
But you forgot the ending. The U.S. trained Contras were scumbags who tortured and killed civilians who didn't go along with their political ideas(That's bad, right?), and we helped a bad government replace a bad one. What an achievement.

Waste of lives Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 8:03 AM

SERGEANTX

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Feels good to say "Commie" again.

Someone over on the UB was trotting that one out in the Cindy Sheehan smear campaign. It's rather quaint, in it's own paranoid, old-coot, kind of way.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 11:17 AM

PERFESSERGEE

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Wow, that was good. Attention to detail, I'm impressed.
But you forgot the ending. The U.S. trained Contras were scumbags who tortured and killed civilians who didn't go along with their political ideas(That's bad, right?), and we helped a bad government replace a bad one. What an achievement.

Waste of lives Chrisisall

Nice, succinct synopsis, but a few other items ought to be pointed out as well. As to the endgame, it should also be remembered that the Contras helped in their own financing (by running drugs - funny how the right wing conveniently forgets that). It should also be remembered that Iran/Contra was run from the White House, for heaven's sake. If it looks like and smells like official policy, the rational mind might conclude that it was official policy. And Bush The Elder's claim to have been out of the loop......well, use your own rational mind. (Please note, I said "rational mind", not "rationalizing mind" - there's a rather large difference).

And finally, the whole damned thing was utterly worthless. The Sandinistas did such a lousy job of running Nicaragua that they got voted out of office. Fancy that, a marxist government (sorry Hero, but Nicaragua was never a communist society by any conceivable definition of the word) that let itself be removed from power via a democratic process. And not in favor of ex-Contras, mind you - nobody wanted any part of those gentle folk - just non-marxist business people.

Chrisisall's "waste of lives" is a monumental understatement in this case.

Oh, and then there's Ollie having his conviction reversed on the proverbial technicality.

The whole thing was

perfessergee

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 11:39 AM

CHRISISALL

Thanks for filling in what I left out.
Hey, is it just me, or do I smell a rat in that the Iran hostages were released within hours of Regan becoming president?
Sounds like an under the table deal went on, didn't we give them weapons after the release (you know, through the usual channels) or something to complete the agreement the Regan administration's 'peeps' made w/them?

Fuzzy on that detail Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 12:05 PM

FIVVER

Quote:

Fancy that, a marxist government (sorry Hero, but Nicaragua was never a communist society by any conceivable definition of the word) that let itself be removed from power via a democratic process.

Quote:

communism (From Merriam-Webster online dictionary)

2 capitalized a : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the U.S.S.R. b : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production c : a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably d : communist systems collectively

Sorry Perfessergee. That's one nit that won't pick. Communism and Marxism are twined like a strand of DNA.

As for why Danny Ortega allowed a free election, he made the mistake of believing his own press releases and actually thought he would win. A lot of people shared his delusion - Jimmy Carter, Bianca Jagger, the Birkenstock Bolshies and the mainstream media were all down there to cheer him on.

Quote:

Oh, and then there's Ollie having his conviction reversed on the proverbial technicality.

Yeah, how dare Oliver use up a technicality that should have rightfully gone to a murderer, rapist or child molester.

You conveniently forget that it was the dems in congress who (smelling Regan blood) granted him immunity - and it backfired.

One last point is that the democratic Boland amendment on which this whole thing hinged was probably illegal. The constitution clearly states that foreign policy is in the sphere of the executive not the legislative branch. The War Powers Act is another such one.

Fivver

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 12:56 PM

SERGEANTX

Quote:
Originally posted by fivver:
As for why Danny Ortega allowed a free election, he made the mistake of believing his own press releases and actually thought he would win.

Or maybe he was just willing to respect the will of the people.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 1:50 PM

PERFESSERGEE

Quote:
Originally posted by fivver:
Quote:

Fancy that, a marxist government (sorry Hero, but Nicaragua was never a communist society by any conceivable definition of the word) that let itself be removed from power via a democratic process.

Quote:

communism (From Merriam-Webster online dictionary)

2 capitalized a : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the U.S.S.R. b : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production c : a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably d : communist systems collectively

Sorry Perfessergee. That's one nit that won't pick. Communism and Marxism are twined like a strand of DNA.

Fivver, sorry to rain on your parade, but I don't think you read my post carefully, and Nicaraguan society of the Sandinista era didn't match any of the 4 definitions you've pasted in.

a) a sociey is not a doctrine

b) and c) The Sandinistas might have wanted to pull these off, but they never did. Nicaragua still had private property aplenty - the guy who beat Ortega was the owner and publisher of the opposition newspaper. Yep, there was such a thing - they tend to be in very short supply in communist countries.

Failing a-c, it couldn't logically belong to d)

The Sandinistas may have been capital-C Communist wannabes, but they never got there. And now they're out of power and good riddance..........

perfessergee

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 2:37 PM

FIVVER

Quote:

the guy who beat Ortega was the owner and publisher of the opposition newspaper. Yep, there was such a thing - they tend to be in very short supply in communist countries.

Uh, actually the 'guy' who beat Ortega was Violeta Chamorro. Her husband Pedro had been assinated by Samoza in 1978. She took over running his newspaper La Prensa after he was killed. It was regularly censored or closed as the occasion warranted by Ortega. I guess our ideas of a free press differ.

SergeantX, I'd like to address your comment about him resigning out of the goodness of his heart. I'll grant there may have been some of that. But because of the immediately preceeding Iran-Contra scandal, this was not your run of the mill election in a foreign country. Both sides in Washington were fully invested in it's outcome. The reps were of course for Violeta and the dems for Danny. There was a steady stream of senators, congressmen and even an ex-president from the left going down there to offer him support and encouragement. This was heady stuff! Add to that the pre-election polling showed Ortega with a commanding lead, he felt he had nothing to lose by holding a fair election. When he was solidly trounced he in a fair election he faced the choices of giving in or tossing Violeta into jail and ignoring the results. At that point even the left would have had to denounce him and call for his ouster.

Why were the pre-election polls so wrong? The best answer I've seen comes from PJ O'Rourke (read everything he's written!). I'm paraphrasing Pollster: 'Hello there powerless peasant, I'm somebody you don't know, who my be reporting your answer back to the government that issues you your ration card. Now please tell me how you plan to vote in the election.'

But for those on the left, take heart. Ortega is still kicking around in Nicaraguan politics.

carpal tunneled Fivver

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 3:17 PM

SERGEANTX

Quote:
Originally posted by fivver:
SergeantX, I'd like to address your comment about him resigning out of the goodness of his heart....

LOL... I didn't say anything like that. It just seemed a little ridiculous slamming someone because they allowed the people to reject them through a popular election. I mean, what the hell? It's more than we're willing to do in Iraq.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 4:40 PM

SERGEANTX

Quote:
Originally posted by lynchaj:
WTF? I have made no statements at all about what mistakes the US has made, if any. Please do not interpret that as saying I believe there are none. You should not draw any conclusion from a lack of a statement. I merely choose not to reply in an obvious bait by HK. There is a huge difference -- one I hope you can understand.

A lack of evidence does not make for evidence of nonexistence.

I'm afraid you've stumped me this time, AJ

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 18, 2005 1:27 PM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by lynchaj:
The whole Iran/Contra affair was some misinformed individuals who broke the law. The US or the US government as a whole did not do it

Ollie was doing what he did on orders, let's not pretend differently.
- Remember, plausible deniability -
He was not instructed as to exactly HOW to achieve his goal..
- Plausible Deniability, ever hear of it? -
He was promised a saftey net should he be discovered (did he go to prison?).
And Regan didn't know what he was up to.
- P D strikes again -

Do you really not know how it works?

Or are you just plausibly in denial Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 18, 2005 1:46 PM

CHRISISALL

Sarge, I just saw Sin City, and a line from it really hit me:
" Real power is telling the biggest lie that everyone knows in their hearts isn't true, and makin' them believe it anyway."

Forgive if I misquoted slightly, but wow, I think what was an intense moment for me is something most politicians in the world (and kings of old, for that matter) have always just taken for granted...

Lost in the woods Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 18, 2005 5:03 PM

GINOBIFFARONI

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Sarge, I just saw Sin City, and a line from it really hit me:
" Real power is telling the biggest lie that everyone knows in their hearts isn't true, and makin' them believe it anyway."

Forgive if I misquoted slightly, but wow, I think what was an intense moment for me is something most politicians in the world (and kings of old, for that matter) have always just taken for granted...

Lost in the woods Chrisisall

Wow, love the quote !!

Thanks Chris

When my eloquence escapes you
My logic ties you up and rapes you

http://www.oldielyrics.com/lyrics/the_police/de_do_do_do_de_da_da_da.h
tml

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 18, 2005 6:48 PM

PERFESSERGEE

Quote:
Originally posted by fivver:
Quote:

the guy who beat Ortega was the owner and publisher of the opposition newspaper. Yep, there was such a thing - they tend to be in very short supply in communist countries.

Uh, actually the 'guy' who beat Ortega was Violeta Chamorro. Her husband Pedro had been assinated by Samoza in 1978. She took over running his newspaper La Prensa after he was killed. It was regularly censored or closed as the occasion warranted by Ortega. I guess our ideas of a free press differ.

Fivver, thanks for the correction - I'd forgotten the gender of the person who beat Ortega, and thank you also for pointing out that her husband was murdered by the same people who became, with the support of the White House, the "Contras". But I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to put words in my mouth, or that at least you'd read my post. I never even mentioned "free press". I said that there was an opposition newspaper. Tain't the same thing. Both Argentina and Chile (two countries that I've lived and worked in) had opposition newspapers during their military dictatorships (and god only knows that those weren't communist dictatorships), but nothing like a free press. I'm well aware of the difference. Further, I'm no apologist for any totalitarian regime, be it of the left, the right, or religious fundamentalist of any stripe or direction.

The whole point of my post was that Nicaragua was not a communist society, not by my definition or any of the four you posted. It's government was run by avowed communists for a time, but it never achieved anything like a communist state. And then its people rejected the avowed communists. The Sandinistas keep trying to come to power again through the ballot box, but it just ain't working. Democracy in action. And your suggestions that Carter, and every other Democrat who got involved(disclaimer - I'm not a Democrat) were there to keep democracy from happening and to prop up what you consider to have been a communist government are so amazing that I have to censor myself in the interest of civility.

perfessergee

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 21, 2005 2:56 AM

FANTASTICLAUGHINGFAIRY

Basically Bush is a power-hungry war-mongerer, who would like nothing better than to bomb Iran, and unless the American public make it clear to him that if he does that, he will be despised as one of the worst Presidents in history (or something along those lines - best not mention the fact that he will anyway, at least by the rest of the world's standards), then he will set about it with a song in his heart. If you do, he may just set about it with a quiter song, maybe 'Pack up you troubles in you old kit-bag' as opposed to 'She'll be comin' round the mountain when she comes (yeehah!)' or something along those lines.
My point here is - unless the entire US nation comes out against it - Iran will probably be bombed.
Annoyingly my complete sheep of a PM, will probably join in rather than lose Bush as his bestest pally.

sorry, but it's likely to be true.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 21, 2005 10:56 PM

ISGABRIELRIGHT

Just to comment on what I take to be the original question. No, I don't think that the U.S. public in general believe that Pres. Bush will strictly speaking use force as a last resort. I also don't think that overall that this bothers the U.S. public that much. I think what would bother them would be if he would use the military without seriously considering other forms of response. So I think Bush will make some kind of show of considering other options before initiating a military response. I don't actually think at this time it would be his preferred response. IMO he would prefer to get away with saying "I sure don't want a fight, but I won't run if there needs to be one." without having to add another simultaneous force deployment. I don't take violent action by the U.S.A. toward Iran as a given but with the current administration it sure isn't implausible.

ISGABRIELRIGHT
Canadian Firefly fan since 2005 August 20

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE