Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Being young and actually reading about history is better than being an old fool. The Soviet Union would've collapsed whether or not Reagan, Carter or John Travolta were president. The Soviet government putting a huge tax on vodka, economic and political collapse, glastnost/reforms letting in Western products and ideas and Gorbachev moving to end the Cold War were the reasons there's no USSR today. Saying Reagan killed the USSR is simply untrue and it is shameful to deny the role of the actual people within the USSR who did the real work in its collapse like Gorbachev, Lech Walesa and the millions of brave protestors and dissidents.
Pretty much true. In addition, the CIA should really have realized how weak they really were for quite a few years prior. Intead we were sold a bill of goods about how we were falling behind the Soviets.
I pretty much believe we didn't have a president for most of Reagans second term.
How much credit do you give to Ronald Reagan for the freeing of the Iran hostages?
You don't know how long after Carter left office it was when Iran gave the prisoners up. Look that one up and then tell me if it was Carter or Bush I who caused them to do what they did.
It's no use trying to explain it to them. You can tell the GOP six ways to Sunday, and they'll never accept the fact that the black guy did the job Bush failed to do the entire 8 years he was in office tooting his horn. Not only are the GOP apathetic towards the working class, women, and minorities. They also hate being outshined by the DNP. It's that simple.
Is there just a wee chance that you just told on yourself? You said that Bush failed to do something in 8 years when he had served most of one year when 9/11 came about. Of course, Clinton had had bin Laden on his hands for a number of years and he had him in hand a couple of times and failed to take him. Darn that Bush. He never did order anybody to kill bin Laden, did he?
Wow, grasping and desperation have reached new heights with this thread.
Carter's poor leadership doomed the hostage rescue mission to failure. Good men died while attempting to save others as a result of that poor leadership. Had there been decisive leadership those deaths need not have occurred.
This is truly one of the most poorly reasoned and partisan motivated threads divorced from anything approaching reality I've seen on CD. That's an impressive accomplishment.
As an aside, Obama assumed no personal risk for greenlighting the Bin Laden mission. He did little other than act as any other sitting President would have. To attempt to assign Obama credit for the risks readily assumed by the actual shooters shows either an impressive degree of naivete or utterly pathetic uninformed partisan bias. It's a well accepted fact in military circles that Iran waited until Regan was in office to release the hostages in order to rub Carter's nose in his own ineptitude.
Thanks to the OP for further illustrating they're more than willing to steal and impugn the valor of good men in order to advance their own pathetic personal partisan agendas.
Last edited by outbacknv; 04-10-2012 at 08:36 PM..
Is there just a wee chance that you just told on yourself? You said that Bush failed to do something in 8 years when he had served most of one year when 9/11 came about. Of course, Clinton had had bin Laden on his hands for a number of years and he had him in hand a couple of times and failed to take him. Darn that Bush. He never did order anybody to kill bin Laden, did he?
Yes, and of course Reagan trained Bin Laden and the Taliban when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. What's your point? Bill Clinton admitted that he tried getting Bin Laden and he failed. Osama Bin Laden was a crafty one, but Bush didn't put enough emphasis on getting him after 9/11. Even Dubya admitted it wasn't a high priority. He was hellbent on going to war with Iraq since the moment he stole the election, but they used 9/11 as a whitewash to cajole the American public and Congress into war. The fact is that Barack Obama had all his ducks in a row and made damn sure they had the right guy before he gave the mission the green light. They even crashed the helicopter outside the compound, but Obama insisted that they finish the job and have a back-up plan.
Being young and actually reading about history is better than being an old fool. The Soviet Union would've collapsed whether or not Reagan, Carter or John Travolta were president. The Soviet government putting a huge tax on vodka, economic and political collapse, glastnost/reforms letting in Western products and ideas and Gorbachev moving to end the Cold War were the reasons there's no USSR today. Saying Reagan killed the USSR is simply untrue and it is shameful to deny the role of the actual people within the USSR who did the real work in its collapse like Gorbachev, Lech Walesa and the millions of brave protestors and dissidents.
WRONG! The reason the USSR collapsed was because, during Reagan's administration, they artificially suppressed oil prices to the point that the USSR couldn't afford to pay for their socialist regime. The USSR's BIGGEST EXPORT was oil - look it up. Now our government is purposely raising oil prices to do the exact same thing (opposite strategy) to China. It's costing China billions too much to support their rapid growth, and they are already talking about a China collapse. Our government manipulates commodities, currencies and anything else in order to break the backs of entire countries. It's nothing new.
"it is shameful to deny the role of the actual people within the USSR who did the real work in its collapse like Gorbachev, Lech Walesa and the millions of brave protestors and dissidents"
Gorbachev a dissident? WOW!!! You're reading history from the looking glass. Better to listen to people who lived it than be young and foolish, and broadcasting it.
This thread is very simple. Obama supposedly shouldn't get any credit for killing bin Laden because "all he did was give the order" That same logic would also apply to Reagan and the Iran hostages and also the fall of the Berlin wall. In fact even more so because not only did Reagan not personally free those hostages or tear down that wall, he didn't even give the orders
Let's suppose for a minute Bush could of had a third term (please excuse the exploding liberal heads ). The likely outcome with Bin Laden would have been the same, yes? Could you make any argument as to why it wouldn't have been the same?
On the other hand the fate of the hostages is debatable if Jimmy Carter had a second term. You're right, Reagan didn't have to do anything. His mere presence is all that was required. The Iranians were very aware the games were over and the **** was going to hit the fan if they weren't released.
I take issue with Politicians taking credit for any successful Military hop.
The Military succeeds inspite of politicians and their interference, not because of it.
Obama. Just what strategic experience does he have? What tactical experience? The answer is none.
So SEAL Team 6 went in and did the job they were tasked with doing.
The success is 100% in the hands of the Military. Obama's only function was to give the go ahead. Sorry but that doesn't really make him a part of the A-Team.
If we are to give Obama credit for this mission, will we also give him credit for missions gone bad or for when soldiers go rogue? He is the commander and chief right? He gets credit for the good he should get credit for the bad.
Soldier goes rogue and slaughters civilians. This happened on Obama's watch. Who gets the credit?
Muslim Doctor shoots up a whole lot of his fellow soldiers. Obama's watch do we give credit?
No?
Only when its something that works out well and is like a movie?
I say no to all the above.
Obama had nothing to do with the actual mission, the training for the mission or the execution of the mission.
He is also innocent of wrong doing when soldiers go rogue.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). The likely outcome with Bin Laden would have been the same, yes? Could you make any argument as to why it wouldn't have been the same?
