Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Carter created the hostage crisis, if he had rescued them he still would have lost dumbass...
Reaganomics lead to the longest and greatest growth in economic history.
but thanks for proving you're ignorant, and unteachable, again
He did 2 things.
He let it be known that aggression would be met with force. It wasn't a coincidence that the Soviet Army had a very bad time in Afghanistan and it started about the same time that Reagan and Company got serious about backing the rebels.
He also increased military spending. Colin Powell (who was a staffer with Casper Weinberger at the time) referred to it as something like, "We were done with our requisition list. We then moved on to our wish list. After that, we moved onto our dream list." That was in his autobiography "My American Journey". Soviet-style communism has an Achille's heel. There is an upper limit it can spend before the entire system grinds to a halt. They found theirs. Later after th Cold War ended, Powell wrote something along the lines of an aide of his saying (about the Russian fleet), "This fleet is going bye bye" meaning it could barely stay afloat. Hence Peristroyka (sp?), hence the coup, hence the end of the Soviet Union.
If you want to blame Reagan for the arguably more dangerous CIS and former Soviet satellite states; go ahead. But the biggest threat this nation ever faced was stared down by the leadership of one man; Ronald Wilson Reagan.
That alone qualifies him for his own mountain--screw Mt. Rushmore.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ompared-to-this-great-man-14.html#post5569683
However, what you saw with Reagan's 8 years was that time period between spending on a credit card and the bill coming due in later administrations. No kidding there was growth. But the reasons are pretty obvious. It silly to give Reagan credit as being some sort of fiscal genius. Obviously he wasn't and it sat a dangerous precedent--every President after him looks at his enduring popularity and sees no problem running up the budget--hell Ronnie got away with it; right?
Nobody said "fiscal genius". He was an economic "genius" in that he realized Dumbocrats had collapsed our economy and that the solution was to get the federal government out of the economy (where it didn't belong in the first place considering the federal government has zero constitutional authority there).
Every problem we've ever experienced stems from the federal governments unconstitutional actions.
Brilliant in its conception and execution!
At the end I wanted to see MORE!!!
This could have helped prevent a second term!
You want more @Mojo2? Ask and ye shall receive....
[ame=http://youtu.be/zAFCAWNFJPg]Cartoon - Ronald Reagan on Big Government Programs - YouTube[/ame]
Carter created the hostage crisis, if he had rescued them he still would have lost dumbass...
No, he wouldn't have, but you would have had to have been there to know that.
And the CIA created the crisis, the very day it overthrew the democratically government and replaced it with our Puppet the Shah.
Carter created the hostage crisis, if he had rescued them he still would have lost dumbass...
No, he wouldn't have, but you would have had to have been there to know that.
And the CIA created the crisis, the very day it overthrew the democratically government and replaced it with our Puppet the Shah.
You're one of THOSE posters, eh?
It was yet another GOP foreign policy fuck up. It never should have happened.
And yet your completely incapable of articulating what was a "fuck up" about it. The U.S. got the approval of Israel before the deal (because the Israeli's had the most to lose). Then, at the request of the Israeli's, they allowed them to broker the deal.
The results of the deal allowed the U.S. to fund the Contra rebels against the Communist Sandinista's and resulted in the release of hostages. It was basically the most successful "foreign policy" decision in U.S. history.
As I said before, you might want to look into reality before blindly parroting liberal propaganda. Just say'n....
Reagan sold arms to a terrorist state. He then used the funds to spend on a bunch of ill-trained rabble in Nicaragua, which itself got rid of the Sandinistas by elections anyway. What a waste. And since when do we require the okay from Israel? Why does the GOP always put Israel in charge of our foreign policy? And this is all a success? OMG, no wonder Mitt lost. Most Americans have finally learned how incompetent the GOP is. Too bad the lesson had to be so soaked with blood.
You remind me of a partisan hack. Let's see if you aren't by answering this one question. Did Reagan sell arms to our sworn enemy Iran, yes or no?And yet your completely incapable of articulating what was a "fuck up" about it. The U.S. got the approval of Israel before the deal (because the Israeli's had the most to lose). Then, at the request of the Israeli's, they allowed them to broker the deal.
The results of the deal allowed the U.S. to fund the Contra rebels against the Communist Sandinista's and resulted in the release of hostages. It was basically the most successful "foreign policy" decision in U.S. history.
As I said before, you might want to look into reality before blindly parroting liberal propaganda. Just say'n....
Reagan sold arms to a terrorist state. He then used the funds to spend on a bunch of ill-trained rabble in Nicaragua, which itself got rid of the Sandinistas by elections anyway. What a waste. And since when do we require the okay from Israel? Why does the GOP always put Israel in charge of our foreign policy? And this is all a success? OMG, no wonder Mitt lost. Most Americans have finally learned how incompetent the GOP is. Too bad the lesson had to be so soaked with blood.
You remind me of someone who'd conclude our beloved four legged canine pals were our masters and we were their servants because we follow them around and pick up their feces.
The only people who would agree with your positions are imbeciles and bigots or both.
You remind me of a partisan hack. Let's see if you aren't by answering this one question. Did Reagan sell arms to our sworn enemy Iran, yes or no?Reagan sold arms to a terrorist state. He then used the funds to spend on a bunch of ill-trained rabble in Nicaragua, which itself got rid of the Sandinistas by elections anyway. What a waste. And since when do we require the okay from Israel? Why does the GOP always put Israel in charge of our foreign policy? And this is all a success? OMG, no wonder Mitt lost. Most Americans have finally learned how incompetent the GOP is. Too bad the lesson had to be so soaked with blood.
You remind me of someone who'd conclude our beloved four legged canine pals were our masters and we were their servants because we follow them around and pick up their feces.
The only people who would agree with your positions are imbeciles and bigots or both.
While President Ronald Reagan was a supporter of the Contra cause,[7] the evidence is disputed as to whether he authorized the diversion of the money raised by the Iranian arms sales to the Contras.[3][4][8] Handwritten notes taken by Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger on December 7, 1985, indicate that Reagan was aware of potential hostage transfers with Iran, as well as the sale of Hawk and TOW missiles to "moderate elements" within that country.[9] Weinberger wrote that Reagan said "he could answer to charges of illegality but couldn't answer to the charge that 'big strong President Reagan passed up a chance to free the hostages'".[9] After the weapon sales were revealed in November 1986, Reagan appeared on national television and stated that the weapons transfers had indeed occurred, but that the United States did not trade arms for hostages.[10] The investigation was impeded when large volumes of documents relating to the scandal were destroyed or withheld from investigators by Reagan administration officials.[11] On March 4, 1987, Reagan returned to the airwaves in a nationally televised address, taking full responsibility for any actions that he was unaware of, and admitting that "what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages".[12]
You remind me of a partisan hack. Let's see if you aren't by answering this one question. Did Reagan sell arms to our sworn enemy Iran, yes or no?
Yes or no question and you attack? You're a typical dishonest partisan hack. Thanks for playing.You remind me of a partisan hack. Let's see if you aren't by answering this one question. Did Reagan sell arms to our sworn enemy Iran, yes or no?
In post #101 you state (and I quote) "And the CIA created the crisis, the very day it overthrew the democratically government and replaced it with our Puppet the Shah."
Now you turn around and call them a "sworn enemy".
So which is it [MENTION=47594]PaintMyHouse[/MENTION] - were they our "sworn enemy" or were they puppets on our strings under our control?!?
You're the worst form of partisan hack - the kind who will give lie after lie while forgetting your previous false narrative. Do me a favor - get your story (ie your lie) straight and come back with one version.
People like you are so annoying....
When did Reagan actually began losing his mind to Alzheimer's? Selling weapons to Middle Eastern terrorists to fund genocide in Central America sounds too bizarre. Someone had to be insane to think that was a good idea.
Yes or no question and you attack? You're a typical dishonest partisan hack. Thanks for playing.You remind me of a partisan hack. Let's see if you aren't by answering this one question. Did Reagan sell arms to our sworn enemy Iran, yes or no?
In post #101 you state (and I quote) "And the CIA created the crisis, the very day it overthrew the democratically government and replaced it with our Puppet the Shah."
Now you turn around and call them a "sworn enemy".
So which is it [MENTION=47594]PaintMyHouse[/MENTION] - were they our "sworn enemy" or were they puppets on our strings under our control?!?
You're the worst form of partisan hack - the kind who will give lie after lie while forgetting your previous false narrative. Do me a favor - get your story (ie your lie) straight and come back with one version.
People like you are so annoying....
1. The Shah was our puppet, who ran a police state, which is why it fell when we cut off support.Yes or no question and you attack? You're a typical dishonest partisan hack. Thanks for playing.In post #101 you state (and I quote) "And the CIA created the crisis, the very day it overthrew the democratically government and replaced it with our Puppet the Shah."
Now you turn around and call them a "sworn enemy".
So which is it [MENTION=47594]PaintMyHouse[/MENTION] - were they our "sworn enemy" or were they puppets on our strings under our control?!?
You're the worst form of partisan hack - the kind who will give lie after lie while forgetting your previous false narrative. Do me a favor - get your story (ie your lie) straight and come back with one version.
People like you are so annoying....
So in your mind - highlighting your ignorant and despicable contradictions are an "attack"?
Come on chief - in back to back posts you state that the CIA controlled Iran and they were puppets on our string and then you call them our "mortal enemy". They can't be both genius.
So which is it you partisan hack? Please pick a false narrative and stick with it. I can't answer a "yes or no" question if you contradict your own question...
So which is it junior? Please make a decision and then I will answer your question.
Yes or no question and you attack? You're a typical dishonest partisan hack. Thanks for playing.In post #101 you state (and I quote) "And the CIA created the crisis, the very day it overthrew the democratically government and replaced it with our Puppet the Shah."
Now you turn around and call them a "sworn enemy".
So which is it [MENTION=47594]PaintMyHouse[/MENTION] - were they our "sworn enemy" or were they puppets on our strings under our control?!?
You're the worst form of partisan hack - the kind who will give lie after lie while forgetting your previous false narrative. Do me a favor - get your story (ie your lie) straight and come back with one version.
People like you are so annoying....
So in your mind - highlighting your ignorant and despicable contradictions are an "attack"?
Come on chief - in back to back posts you state that the CIA controlled Iran and they were puppets on our string and then you call them our "mortal enemy". They can't be both genius.
So which is it you partisan hack? Please pick a false narrative and stick with it. I can't answer a "yes or no" question if you contradict your own question...
So which is it junior? Please make a decision and then I will answer your question.
1. The Shah was our puppet, who ran a police state, which is why it fell when we cut off support.Yes or no question and you attack? You're a typical dishonest partisan hack. Thanks for playing.
So in your mind - highlighting your ignorant and despicable contradictions are an "attack"?
Come on chief - in back to back posts you state that the CIA controlled Iran and they were puppets on our string and then you call them our "mortal enemy". They can't be both genius.
So which is it you partisan hack? Please pick a false narrative and stick with it. I can't answer a "yes or no" question if you contradict your own question...
So which is it junior? Please make a decision and then I will answer your question.
2. The CIA put him in power, and overthrew a democratically elected prime minister who threatened to nationalize the oil industry.
3. Iran held a religious revolution and became our sworn enemy, including taking over our embassy and holding dozen of our people hostage.
4. Did Reagan sell arms to Iran, at that point a sworn enemy of the US, yes or no?
Your turn hot shot. Show us what you got or STFU.
1. The Shah was our puppet, who ran a police state, which is why it fell when we cut off support.Yes or no question and you attack? You're a typical dishonest partisan hack. Thanks for playing.
So in your mind - highlighting your ignorant and despicable contradictions are an "attack"?
Come on chief - in back to back posts you state that the CIA controlled Iran and they were puppets on our string and then you call them our "mortal enemy". They can't be both genius.
So which is it you partisan hack? Please pick a false narrative and stick with it. I can't answer a "yes or no" question if you contradict your own question...
So which is it junior? Please make a decision and then I will answer your question.
2. The CIA put him in power, and overthrew a democratically elected prime minister who threatened to nationalize the oil industry.
3. Iran held a religious revolution and became our sworn enemy, including taking over our embassy and holding dozen of our people hostage.
4. Did Reagan sell arms to Iran, at that point a sworn enemy of the US, yes or no?
Your turn hot shot. Show us what you got or STFU.
