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 whole Iran-Contra scandal that rocked the Reagan admin stemmed from something called the 'Boland Amendment' which forbade monetary aid to the Contras of Nicaragua. People in the Reagan admin complained bitterly about it. George Shultz called it "congressional micromanagement of the U.S. economic and security assistance." I think it was probably bad foreign policy, but nonetheless it was the law of the land, and the Reagan admin didn't dare openly flout it. Ollie North and Robert MacFarlane ran the op that ran afoul of the Boland Amendment, which brought about the scandal. But North shredded all documents but one, and that one could not be connected to Ronald Reagan. Nonetheless, of course, liberals yowled to high heaven and screamed that the admin had crapped all over the rule of law.
Compare this to our present situation vis a vis Egypt. There is something called the 'Foreign Assistance Act,' passed and signed into law by JFK, which forbids monetary aid to foreign gov'ts which are the product of a military coup. Lawfare › Will Obama Administration Cut Off Foreign Assistance to Egypt?
So far the admin refuses to label what happened in Egypt as a 'coup.' I heard an analyst predict that the Obama admin would go through whatever 'Orwellian' word games necessary to get around the law and keep aid flowing to Egypt. The indicators are already there, and I don't think anyone doubts that the admin is about to do exactly that.
It's remarkably similar, yet different. In the case of Iran-Contra, the dirty work was done by a relatively low-level staffer, and Reagan claimed, with considerable credence. that he had not known about the op. With the Obama admin it's all done right out in the open, with Pres. Obama clearly fully apprised. I guess that being a liberal democrat means that you can crap on 'rule of law' and not have to say you're sorry.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,419,437 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz
The whole Iran-Contra scandal that rocked the Reagan admin stemmed from something called the 'Boland Amendment' which forbade monetary aid to the Contras of Nicaragua. People in the Reagan admin complained bitterly about it. George Shultz called it "congressional micromanagement of the U.S. economic and security assistance." I think it was probably bad foreign policy, but nonetheless it was the law of the land, and the Reagan admin didn't dare openly flout it. Ollie North and Robert MacFarlane ran the op that ran afoul of the Boland Amendment, which brought about the scandal. But North shredded all documents but one, and that one could not be connected to Ronald Reagan. Nonetheless, of course, liberals yowled to high heaven and screamed that the admin had crapped all over the rule of law.
Compare this to our present situation vis a vis Egypt. There is something called the 'Foreign Assistance Act,' passed and signed into law by JFK, which forbids monetary aid to foreign gov'ts which are the product of a military coup. Lawfare › Will Obama Administration Cut Off Foreign Assistance to Egypt?
So far the admin refuses to label what happened in Egypt as a 'coup.' I heard an analyst predict that the Obama admin would go through whatever 'Orwellian' word games necessary to get around the law and keep aid flowing to Egypt.
It's remarkably similar, yet different. In the case of Iran-Contra, the dirty work was done by a relatively low-level staffer, and Reagan claimed, with considerable credence. that he had not known about the op. With the Obama admin it's all done right out in the open, with Pres. Obama clearly fully apprised. I guess that being a liberal democrat means that you can crap on 'rule of law' and not have to say you're sorry.
I guess being a conservative republican you only hold Democratic Presidents responsible for what happens under their administrations while being perfectly happy to accept "Well, I don't remember" as a valid excuse for the actions of their administrations from Republican Presidents, eh?
Reagan bribed terrorists for the release of hostages real right wing tough president decision. I can only imagine the right wing response if Obama gave aide to terrorists for protection.
Completely different situations, similar in only right-wing-landia
Reagan bribed terrorists for the release of hostages real right wing tough president decision. I can only imagine the right wing response if Obama gave aide to terrorists for protection.
Completely different situations, similar in only right-wing-landia
Off topic. The topic is aid to a foreign nation in contravention of a law passed by Congress. In that regard it's the same deal. There was no law against bribes to gain the release of hostages. And yes Reagan was obsessed with getting American hostages released. So sue him.
Off topic. The topic is aid to a foreign nation in contravention of a law passed by Congress. In that regard it's the same deal. There was no law against bribes to gain the release of hostages. And yes Reagan was obsessed with getting American hostages released. So sue him.
Off target, I don't think so cabinet members went to jail because congress had passed restrictions precluding aid to the Contras yet Reagan, or should I say the Reagan administration because Reagan had no knowledge, provided aid to them. They were terrorists, Egypt is an ally and important to success in the middle east.
Did you really say there are no laws against bribes to gain the release of hostages.
Off target, I don't think so cabinet members went to jail because congress had passed restrictions precluding aid to the Contras yet Reagan, or should I say the Reagan administration because Reagan had no knowledge, provided aid to them. They were terrorists, Egypt is an ally and important to success in the middle east.
Did you really say there are no laws against bribes to gain the release of hostages.
The terrorist angle is another thread. What this is about is aid to a foreign nation in contravention of a law passed by congress. Thanks for proving my point--when it happened under an R admin, the left yowls to high heaven, but when it happens under a D admin, it's excused.
What law forbids bribes to gain the release of hostages?
The terrorist angle is another thread. What this is about is aid to a foreign nation in contravention of a law passed by congress. Thanks for proving my point--when it happened under an R admin, the left yowls to high heaven, but when it happens under a D admin, it's excused.
What law forbids bribes to gain the release of hostages?
The contras were a terrorists attempting to overthrow the Nicaraguan leader Ortega, we liked them.
We didn't however like the Sandinistas in El Salvador. Loved the insurgents in one country, hated them in the other, that part is off topic.
You can't have a discussion regarding Iran-Contra without the details.
Quote:
The Second Boland Amendment
No
appropriations or funds made available pursuant to this [authorization bill] to
the Central Intelligence Agency, the Department of Defense, or any other agency
or entity of the United States involved in intelligence activities may be
obligated or expended for the purpose or which would have the effect of
supporting, directly or indirectly, military or paramilitary operations in
Nicaragua by any nation, group, organization, movement, or individual.
For all intents and purposes, this amendment appeared to prohibit the funding of
the contras with U.S. government funds
Reagan bribed terrorists for the release of hostages real right wing tough president decision. I can only imagine the right wing response if Obama gave aide to terrorists for protection.
Completely different situations, similar in only right-wing-landia
Reagan wasn't even in office when Iran declared they would release the hostages. Many saw it as thumbing their noses at carter has he left office and well panned I what they would have eventually done fearing anther attacked better planned attack to rescue them. Hopefully Obama drops the aid to regime that got in power by a military coup as was part of the terms for the military aid when given .Certainly has we see by the posters the new regime doesn't think much of Obama.
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.
