Reagan, GOP electoral politics, and Iran

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Londoner, Feb 23, 2012.

  1. Londoner
    Offline

    Londoner Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    Messages:
    3,126
    Thanks Received:
    975
    Trophy Points:
    285
    Ratings:
    +1,690
    One of the most troubling alliances over the past 50 years is the one between Reagan and Iran. This relationship came to light during Iran Contra when it was revealed that Reagan sold weapons to Iran to fund terrorist rebels in South America.

    The most troubling aspect of the relationship was the meetings that members of Reagan's team had with Iranian officials (mostly by proxy) while Carter was still in office. Reagan's team basically said they would "play ball" with Iran (which they did) whereas Carter was treating them as an enemy. This lead to the delayed release of the hostages, and it set the stage for 6 years of back-door negotiations between Reagan & Iran (which came to light during the Iran-Contra trial).

    Iran is about to topple Obama through the coming gas spike.

    I have a question. How much do Republicans know about Iran-Contra? After all, Reagan is the father of the New Right. He is arguably one of the two or three most important and respected Conservative presidents in US history. He based his presidency on fighting evil-doers, he was a vocal opponent of terrorism, yet much of his presidency rotated around a partnership with Iran, the leading terrorist state.

    How much do Republican voters know about Reagan's relationship to Iran? Do they know anything about Reagan's relationship to Hussein? Or the fact that he singled-handedly removed Iraq from the official list of terrorist nations?

    Why is this part of the Reagan presidency suppressed? It is very easily researched. What don't we know about Iran, Reagan, and electoral politics?
     
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2012
  2. imbalance
    Offline

    imbalance Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,202
    Thanks Received:
    163
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +163
    Reagan's relationship with Iran has been suppressed, I assume, because it undermines the US' anti-Iran propaganda campaign. The fact is, though, before Iran became a threat to US petrodollar hegemony it -- along with Iraq -- was the prime Cold War target of Soviet imperialism. The threat of Iran to the US was the threat of a Soviet Iran. The threat of Iraq to the US was the threat of a Soviet Iraq. The US could not allow the USSR to ally with either, nor could the US allow the USSR to manipulate a scenario where the US became an official military enemy of either. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that.

    All told, the Iran-Iraq War effectively disarmed Soviet power grabs in the region and thus became a net Cold War victory for the US over the USSR:

    more: The Soviet Union and the Iran

    There was motive for Reagan to play both sides arming both Iran and Iraq. Say what you will about the underhanded nature of this kind of foreign policy, but Reagan got what he wanted in regards to the big picture vs USSR without engaging the US in a foreign war. The US' problems with Iran today have little to do with Reagan's Cold War maneuvering, they are fundamental fractures resulting from the West's routing of Iranian sovereignty beginning in WWII. If anything, Reagan's attempt to open relations with Iran was unfortunate in that it was so small in scope.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  3. rdean
    Offline

    rdean rddean

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    60,001
    Thanks Received:
    6,876
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    chicago
    Ratings:
    +14,864
    Republicans don't need to actually know anything. All the important stuff, they simply "make up".

    Everyone knows that. Even Republicans.
     
  4. imbalance
    Offline

    imbalance Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,202
    Thanks Received:
    163
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +163
    define "Republicans"
     
  5. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,135
    Thanks Received:
    14,896
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +36,829
    Liberals hate Reagan for confronting and defeating their home team the USSR all over the planet
     
  6. Flopper
    Online

    Flopper Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    15,178
    Thanks Received:
    2,695
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Washington
    Ratings:
    +5,267
    I doubt very seriously that Republicans today have any interest in Reagan's dealing with Iran.
     
  7. waltky
    Offline

    waltky Wise ol' monkey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    20,771
    Thanks Received:
    1,788
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Okolona, KY
    Ratings:
    +3,854
    Iran not bein' above board an' up front...
    :eusa_eh:
    'Iran is not telling us everything,' U.N. atomic agency chief says
    Wed March 7, 2012 - Inspectors want to enter Iran's Parchin military base to investigate evidence of activities there.
     
  8. BreezeWood
    Offline

    BreezeWood VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,666
    Thanks Received:
    293
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +474
    That must be where Bush learned WMD ... still siding with Iran.
     
  9. waltky
    Offline

    waltky Wise ol' monkey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    20,771
    Thanks Received:
    1,788
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Okolona, KY
    Ratings:
    +3,854
    Netanyahu: Iran Strike Won't Come In Days, But Years...
    :eusa_eh:
    PM: Iran strike won't come in days, but not matter of years
    3/08/2012 - Netanyahu tells Channel 2 he "hopes pressure on Iran will work," rendering military attack against nuclear facilities unnecessary, but says not pulling trigger on strike may endanger Israel's existence.
    See also:

    Israel asks U.S. for arms that could aid Iran strike
    Thu Mar 8, 2012 - * White House says no agreement reached on arms request * Netanyahu told Obama no decision on Iran attack made
     
  10. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,619
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,214
    If it's easily researched, then it is not suppressed, turdface.
    Why do you bring up a 30 year old incident? Is it to make Obama look better somehow?
    Reagan lived in a different time and there were different conditions. The main threat was communism and the Soviet Union. Making a deal to enable defeating communism was a reasonable bargain. Obama's failed Iran policy is not.
     

Share This Page