Why Is Ronald Reagan Still Considered A Conservative Hero?

[MarcATL]

So let me get this straight...

Conservatives truly believe it was Reagan's speech that said "tear down this wall" that made all the difference?

You mean the Europeans heard those words coming out of his mouth and said to themselves, "Well that's it, we just GOTTA tear down these walls now?"

Is that what I'm to understand?

 

[sangha]

whos the enemy? they all were, Iran gets arms to kill Iraqis and release hostages, we get money to fund contras...in geo-politics thats called a win win. problem? he got caught. whoops.

Only an America hating CON$ervative would call arming one terrorist group to support another terrorist group a "win win."

uh huh. and aside from the Iranian army what was the terrorist grp. we were arming?

and dude, don't make personal asides okay, lets keep it adult.

The Iranian military is a terrorist organization, and reagan gave them Stingers.

WIngnuts think arming terrorists is a win-win

That's why they love Reagan for giving weapons to the people is Afghanistan; people like Osama Bin Laden. They armed the Iranian terrorists and the Al Queda terrorists. For wingnuts, that's a win-win!!!

And we're still waiting for you to tell us how the serial #'s can be used to determine the # of nukes GB has. So far, all you've got is "someone said it MIGHT BE TRUE", and this is supposed to make us believe you don't swallow the propoganda whole

I'm not surprised to see you avoiding the question. You repeat every wingnut lie you hear, and you got pwned for it. Now, you desperate to avoid defending your wingnut claims.

 

[edthecynic]

The patented CON$ervative Dumb Act when caught with your foot in your mouth. YOU only named two terrorists groups and you acknowledged one of them, but only a CON$ervative can pretend to be too stupid to figure out who the other terrorist group is!

I'm going to go out on a limb and say i'm not generally considered a "conservative". What terrorist group are you referring to?

The Contras, of course.

They actually DID everything Reagan accused the Sandinistas of doing. Every human rights group that examined the evidence found that the Contras attacked purely civilian targets and that their tactics included murder, rape, beatings, kidnapping and disruption of harvests.

 

[sangha]

So let me get this straight...

Conservatives truly believe it was Reagan's speech that said "tear down this wall" that made all the difference?

You mean the Europeans heard those words coming out of his mouth and said to themselves, "Well that's it, we just GOTTA tear down these walls now?"

Is that what I'm to understand?

If wingnuts didn't lie, they'd have nothing to say

The actual quote is "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall! "

After the speech, Mr Gorbachev promptly proceeded to NOT tear down that wall.

 

[sangha]

The patented CON$ervative Dumb Act when caught with your foot in your mouth. YOU only named two terrorists groups and you acknowledged one of them, but only a CON$ervative can pretend to be too stupid to figure out who the other terrorist group is!

I'm going to go out on a limb and say i'm not generally considered a "conservative". What terrorist group are you referring to?

The Contras, of course.

They actually DID everything Reagan accused the Sandinistas of doing. Every human rights group that examined the evidence found that the Contras attacked purely civilian targets and that their tactics included murder, rape, beatings, kidnapping and disruption of harvests.

The Contra terrorists that Reagan loved (like the Al Queda terrorists that Reagan armed) kidnapped, raped, and executed 6 xtian nuns with the help of US intelligence

 

[edthecynic]

So let me get this straight...

Conservatives truly believe it was Reagan's speech that said "tear down this wall" that made all the difference?

You mean the Europeans heard those words coming out of his mouth and said to themselves, "Well that's it, we just GOTTA tear down these walls now?"

Is that what I'm to understand?

Actually
Reagan plagiarized that line from Pink Floyd.
And the wall didn't come down during Reagan's term. It came down during Bush I's term.

 

[sangha]

traded weapons for human lives. Oh, the horror of it all.
Didn't go to war with Lebanon. If he had you would say he was a war monger.
There was a mountain that Leb put canons on and threatend to bombard Israel. Reagan had a battle ship bambard the mountain. Next day, Leb paper says no direct hits were scored, the Israeli paper said the mountain was gone.

Remember "The line of Death?" or Libya? The beating they took put them in their holes for 30 years.
Cold War, won it
Berlin wall, gone.
Dow to record highs

etc, etc

But ignore all that and focus on all the bad things that happened. It's called sour grapes, enjoy the whine, b/c I sure am.

Actually, Reagan the war mongerer did go to war in Lebanon. What do you think the Marines were doing there in the first place?

He just cut and run after the terrorists killed more than 200 Marines

Another "win win" for the wingnuts!!

 

[Trajan]

Only an America hating CON$ervative would call arming one terrorist group to support another terrorist group a "win win."

uh huh. and aside from the Iranian army what was the terrorist grp. we were arming?

and dude, don't make personal asides okay, lets keep it adult.

The patented CON$ervative Dumb Act when caught with your foot in your mouth. YOU only named two terrorists groups and you acknowledged one of them, but only a CON$ervative can pretend to be too stupid to figure out who the other terrorist group is!

a foot in MY mouth? I never named ANY Terrorist org. you did, I asked for clarification, those labels are assigned by YOU in this context. The only thing we have patented here is, your apparent inability to comprehend English as its written.

You added my quote right there, is English your first language or what?

so who's the second grp? I take very little for granted on the net..its usually easier that way as we have just seen in our last exchange as you take huge liberties in digesting English, so thats why I ask and will ask.


and I asked politely, keep it adult...alas.....you 're just another internet tough guy who gets off being a jerk cause they have so little juice in their own lives.
I am sorry you have so little going for you in real life, so if you keep the stupid remarks up, don't expect a response, build your fragile ego by talking to yourself or Marc...okay?

 

[Trajan]

The patented CON$ervative Dumb Act when caught with your foot in your mouth. YOU only named two terrorists groups and you acknowledged one of them, but only a CON$ervative can pretend to be too stupid to figure out who the other terrorist group is!

I'm going to go out on a limb and say i'm not generally considered a "conservative". What terrorist group are you referring to?

The Contras, of course.

They actually DID everything Reagan accused the Sandinistas of doing. Every human rights group that examined the evidence found that the Contras attacked purely civilian targets and that their tactics included murder, rape, beatings, kidnapping and disruption of harvests.

thats why I asked.......you forgot "the drugs"...

 

[Two Thumbs]

So let me get this straight...

Conservatives truly believe it was Reagan's speech that said "tear down this wall" that made all the difference?

You mean the Europeans heard those words coming out of his mouth and said to themselves, "Well that's it, we just GOTTA tear down these walls now?"

Is that what I'm to understand?

Let me see if I get all this.

Everything that bad happend was Reagans fault.

When it went right, he was just some doddering old man that just happened to be there.

Is that right?

 

[Sallow]

The patented CON$ervative Dumb Act when caught with your foot in your mouth. YOU only named two terrorists groups and you acknowledged one of them, but only a CON$ervative can pretend to be too stupid to figure out who the other terrorist group is!

That particular conservative argues points in a civil and adult manner. And without insulting you..he called for the same.

It's bad on you to ignore that.

Sorry about that, but the dumb act really irritates me. If he doesn't want to admit the Contras were terrorists he should right come out and say it like a man, instead of being cutesy playing dumb.

Why, exactly, should he? The Contras were backed by Reagan..and tacitly backed by the US government in the spook world.

Put up your evidence..and show him where he is incorrect. But Trajan is generally polite and respectful.

 

[Two Thumbs]

traded weapons for human lives. Oh, the horror of it all.
Didn't go to war with Lebanon. If he had you would say he was a war monger.
There was a mountain that Leb put canons on and threatend to bombard Israel. Reagan had a battle ship bambard the mountain. Next day, Leb paper says no direct hits were scored, the Israeli paper said the mountain was gone.

Remember "The line of Death?" or Libya? The beating they took put them in their holes for 30 years.
Cold War, won it
Berlin wall, gone.
Dow to record highs

etc, etc

But ignore all that and focus on all the bad things that happened. It's called sour grapes, enjoy the whine, b/c I sure am.

Actually, Reagan the war mongerer did go to war in Lebanon. What do you think the Marines were doing there in the first place?

He just cut and run after the terrorists killed more than 200 Marines

Another "win win" for the wingnuts!!

That was the embassy baracks. we were never at war

1983 Beirut barracks bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the attack on the French barracks, the eight-story 'Drakkar' building, two minutes after the Marine attack, 58 paratroopers from the 1st Parachute Chasseur Regiment were killed and 15 injured, in the single worst military loss for France since the end of the Algerian War.[5]

The blasts led to the withdrawal of the international peacekeeping force from Lebanon, where they had been stationed since the withdrawal of the Palestine Liberation Organization following the Israeli 1982 invasion of Lebanon.

 

[edthecynic]

uh huh. and aside from the Iranian army what was the terrorist grp. we were arming?

and dude, don't make personal asides okay, lets keep it adult.

The patented CON$ervative Dumb Act when caught with your foot in your mouth. YOU only named two terrorists groups and you acknowledged one of them, but only a CON$ervative can pretend to be too stupid to figure out who the other terrorist group is!

a foot in MY mouth? I never named ANY Terrorist org. you did, I asked for clarification, those labels are assigned by YOU in this context. The only thing we have patented here is, your apparent inability to comprehend English as its written.

You added my quote right there, is English your first language or what?

so who's the second grp? I take very little for granted on the net..its usually easier that way as we have just seen in our last exchange as you take huge liberties in digesting English, so thats why I ask and will ask.


and I asked politely, keep it adult...alas.....you 're just another internet tough guy who gets off being a jerk cause they have so little juice in their own lives.
I am sorry you have so little going for you in real life, so if you keep the stupid remarks up, don't expect a response, build your fragile ego by talking to yourself or Marc...okay?

I'll keep it as "polite" as your highlighted post.

 

[Sallow]

traded weapons for human lives. Oh, the horror of it all.
Didn't go to war with Lebanon. If he had you would say he was a war monger.
There was a mountain that Leb put canons on and threatend to bombard Israel. Reagan had a battle ship bambard the mountain. Next day, Leb paper says no direct hits were scored, the Israeli paper said the mountain was gone.

Remember "The line of Death?" or Libya? The beating they took put them in their holes for 30 years.
Cold War, won it
Berlin wall, gone.
Dow to record highs

etc, etc

But ignore all that and focus on all the bad things that happened. It's called sour grapes, enjoy the whine, b/c I sure am.

Actually, Reagan the war mongerer did go to war in Lebanon. What do you think the Marines were doing there in the first place?

He just cut and run after the terrorists killed more than 200 Marines

Another "win win" for the wingnuts!!

That was the embassy baracks. we were never at war

1983 Beirut barracks bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the attack on the French barracks, the eight-story 'Drakkar' building, two minutes after the Marine attack, 58 paratroopers from the 1st Parachute Chasseur Regiment were killed and 15 injured, in the single worst military loss for France since the end of the Algerian War.[5]

The blasts led to the withdrawal of the international peacekeeping force from Lebanon, where they had been stationed since the withdrawal of the Palestine Liberation Organization following the Israeli 1982 invasion of Lebanon.

I actually thought that was a smart move. It's something I applaud, it showed a great amount of courage to do the right thing..as opposed to the "feel good" thing. Lebanon was a mess that the Syrians (who did all the hard work) had to clean up. And then they got their asses kicked out of the Country.

 

[jillian]

The Contras, of course.

They actually DID everything Reagan accused the Sandinistas of doing. Every human rights group that examined the evidence found that the Contras attacked purely civilian targets and that their tactics included murder, rape, beatings, kidnapping and disruption of harvests.

well, perhaps it was the use of the word terrorist, which is something i wouldn't have normally assigned to them. should it be assigned to them? well, maybe.... but i think i always looked at them from the pov of what our country did during that time as opposed to assigning that particular label.

 

[Sallow]

The Contras, of course.

They actually DID everything Reagan accused the Sandinistas of doing. Every human rights group that examined the evidence found that the Contras attacked purely civilian targets and that their tactics included murder, rape, beatings, kidnapping and disruption of harvests.

well, perhaps it was the use of the word terrorist, which is something i wouldn't have normally assigned to them. should it be assigned to them? well, maybe.... but i think i always looked at them from the pov of what our country did during that time as opposed to assigning that particular label.

I think terrorist fits quite nicely when you are talking about the Contras. I don't care about the whole "with us or against us" thing. Terrorists are still terrorists.

 

[sangha]

uh huh. and aside from the Iranian army what was the terrorist grp. we were arming?

and dude, don't make personal asides okay, lets keep it adult.

The patented CON$ervative Dumb Act when caught with your foot in your mouth. YOU only named two terrorists groups and you acknowledged one of them, but only a CON$ervative can pretend to be too stupid to figure out who the other terrorist group is!

a foot in MY mouth? I never named ANY Terrorist org. you did, I asked for clarification, those labels are assigned by YOU in this context. The only thing we have patented here is, your apparent inability to comprehend English as its written.

You added my quote right there, is English your first language or what?

so who's the second grp? I take very little for granted on the net..its usually easier that way as we have just seen in our last exchange as you take huge liberties in digesting English, so thats why I ask and will ask.


and I asked politely, keep it adult...alas.....you 're just another internet tough guy who gets off being a jerk cause they have so little juice in their own lives.
I am sorry you have so little going for you in real life, so if you keep the stupid remarks up, don't expect a response, build your fragile ego by talking to yourself or Marc...okay?

If you were polite and adult, you would explain how giving weapons to a terrorist organization is a win win. It would also help if you were honest, but you are none of these things.

And I'm still waiting for you to explain how the serial #'s will help Russia figure out how many nukes GB has. So far, all you've got is "some journalist said it MIGHT be true"

And how does your unquestioned trust in this journalist demonstrate that you do not swallow the propoganda whole?

I'm guessing you'll avoid explaining your lie as you've done since you've told the lie

 

[edthecynic]

That particular conservative argues points in a civil and adult manner. And without insulting you..he called for the same.

It's bad on you to ignore that.

Sorry about that, but the dumb act really irritates me. If he doesn't want to admit the Contras were terrorists he should right come out and say it like a man, instead of being cutesy playing dumb.

Why, exactly, should he? The Contras were backed by Reagan..and tacitly backed by the US government in the spook world.

Put up your evidence..and show him where he is incorrect. But Trajan is generally polite and respectful.

'Contra' Terrorism Is, Unfortunately, True - Letter - NYTimes.com

To the Editor:
In his April 15 address, President Reagan sought to cast doubt on my report (page A1, March 7) of atrocities by anti-Sandinista ''contras'' in Nicaragua by alleging I was ''shepherded through Nicaragua by Sandinista operatives'' (excerpts, April 16).
Each account of murder, brutality, rape and kidnapping in my report is based on the sworn affidavits of eyewitnesses who were selected and interviewed with no interference and whose names and addresses are listed.
Representatives of the Washington Office on Latin America, the International Human Rights Law Group and Americas Watch have independently confirmed the accuracy of these horrible accounts and documented many others. Your March 7 article also verified four incidents chosen at random. The President cannot deny the systematic terror of these so-called ''freedom fighters.'' REED BRODY New York, April 17, 1985





NICARAGUA

the contras were major and systematic violators of the most basic standards of the laws of armed conflict, including by launching indiscriminate attacks on civilians, selectively murdering non-combatants, and mistreating prisoners. In 1989 the number of contra abuses has been greatly reduced in comparison to the beginning of the peace process, largely because, at least through September, they were entering Nicaragua less frequently. To the extent that the contras have continued to operate, however, they have continued to commit these violations, and toward the end of 1989, abuses by the contras appeared to be on the increase. The Bush administration is responsible for these abuses, not only because the contras are, for all practical purposes, a U.S. force, but also because the Bush administration has continued to minimize and deny these violations, and has refused to investigate them seriously. As in the Reagan years, the Bush State Department has continued to make too much of monitoring mechanisms within the contra movement that have been wholly unsuccessful in prosecuting those responsible for abuses.

 

[sangha]

traded weapons for human lives. Oh, the horror of it all.
Didn't go to war with Lebanon. If he had you would say he was a war monger.
There was a mountain that Leb put canons on and threatend to bombard Israel. Reagan had a battle ship bambard the mountain. Next day, Leb paper says no direct hits were scored, the Israeli paper said the mountain was gone.

Remember "The line of Death?" or Libya? The beating they took put them in their holes for 30 years.
Cold War, won it
Berlin wall, gone.
Dow to record highs

etc, etc

But ignore all that and focus on all the bad things that happened. It's called sour grapes, enjoy the whine, b/c I sure am.

Actually, Reagan the war mongerer did go to war in Lebanon. What do you think the Marines were doing there in the first place?

He just cut and run after the terrorists killed more than 200 Marines

Another "win win" for the wingnuts!!

That was the embassy baracks. we were never at war

1983 Beirut barracks bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the attack on the French barracks, the eight-story 'Drakkar' building, two minutes after the Marine attack, 58 paratroopers from the 1st Parachute Chasseur Regiment were killed and 15 injured, in the single worst military loss for France since the end of the Algerian War.[5]

The blasts led to the withdrawal of the international peacekeeping force from Lebanon, where they had been stationed since the withdrawal of the Palestine Liberation Organization following the Israeli 1982 invasion of Lebanon.

No, we weren't at war. We were just shooting and bombing the Lebanese for target practice!!!

Another "win win", right?

Oh wait!! I see you bolded the words international peacekeeping force!! Obviously, you think the international force that invaded Iraq were waging PEACE!!!

Like the Iraq Not War, the Lebanon Not War was another win win for the wingnuts!!! Too bad they both cost so many american lives. But that's just another win win for the wingnuts. They love it when terrorists kill americans. That's why Reagan armed the terrorists (another win win for the wingnuts)

 

[jillian]

The Contras, of course.

They actually DID everything Reagan accused the Sandinistas of doing. Every human rights group that examined the evidence found that the Contras attacked purely civilian targets and that their tactics included murder, rape, beatings, kidnapping and disruption of harvests.

well, perhaps it was the use of the word terrorist, which is something i wouldn't have normally assigned to them. should it be assigned to them? well, maybe.... but i think i always looked at them from the pov of what our country did during that time as opposed to assigning that particular label.

I think terrorist fits quite nicely when you are talking about the Contras. I don't care about the whole "with us or against us" thing. Terrorists are still terrorists.

perhaps. but i think it might be an overuse of the word. i'm not sure their violence was in furtherance of their political agenda. i think their violence against innocents was more just typical garden variety brutality.