Bull Clinton has failed to release 99% of his records to this date. Sandy Berger’s socks have never been recovered. Nor their contents.

The HBO Film on 9-11 was 99% true and accurate and because of political consternation by the left, Disney pulled it from DVD release.

Reagan supplied the Tajik Northern Alliance, not Oasama’s al Q’aida. Sorry to burst your many bubbles. But maybe I should “Rather” not go there.

9-11 was NOT an “inside job”, but rather that of a conspiracy. A conspiracy to which both bin Laden, Ayman al Zawahiri, and Sheik Khalid Mohammed admitted to VOLUNTARILY. All right, Mohammed needed a little persuasion.

I challenge anyone to refute or even negate the following:

Conditions at Abu Ghraib Prison improved markedly AFTER the invasion by Coaltiion troops.

Carter lost 40 nations in Africa, Central and South America, and Asia to the Soviets. Reagan recovered most of them and in addition, all of Eastern Europe and most of the Soviet States.

Reagan decisively beat Carter because Carter was useless as a president then; as he is useless as an ex-president today.

Carter won one state. The American people loved that man!

Carter negotiated the nuclear agreements with the North Koreans under Bull Clinton, with Madeline Albright’s capable assistance. Good job!

Unlike Carter, who waited 444 days before surrendering to the Mullahs in Tehran, Reagan looked the cameras in the eye just as he took office, told the mullahs: “Let my people go!” and not surprisingly they did. Carter’s vocabulary lacked the necessary four words.

Under Carter the United States experienced 21% inflation. Do the math. Many elderly had their retirement savings entirely wiped out. In those days we called it Carter’s Social Security.

Reagan instituted massive tax cuts launching not only the United States, but the rest of the world, on a 27 year economic boom the likes of which have not been seen in history!

Reagan proved that capitalism is the best avenue to prosperity of a society as a whole, providing the best quality of life for most of the people most pf the time. China, Singapore, Thailand, Taiwan, and the states of the former Soviet Union, including Russia, were listening with open ears — unlike America’s leftists who are, as it was observed repeatedly: “Stupid is as Stupid does.”

In other words: Speak facts to a fool and he’ll call you foolish” — Euripides

But it cannot.

The film is fact-based, the dialogue while snappy, is believable. It is an immensely entertaining flick, perhaps the year’s best. It demonstrates to the world the wisdom of the American character, inventiveness, ingenuity, courage, and conviction. And faith. And what the Democrat Party once, but no longer, stood for. Liberation AND nation building. Liberal = Liberty, Liberation.

Probably all the characteristics most readers of this site lack. which probably shows up in their lives as proof.

The film fails in one aspect though. And possibly only Col. Oliver North, the liaison of black operations at the White House under Ronald Reagan, could answer best.

I speak of, whom are we to credit for winning the Cold War? What is myth, what is fact?

Surely, Democrat Wilson was a key figure, among many others (and the film predictably only credits Democrats for the victory as if a Republican president were not sitting in the Oval Office), but the key figure behind crushing the Soviets in Afghanistan and elsewhere was none other than Ronald Reagan who, when asked before becoming President how he will handle the Cold War, answered with four words: “We win; they lose!”

Did you expect liberal Hollywood to tell the whole story? Or the accurate history?

Without the Israelis who captured the thousands of tons of Soviet weapons that the Afghanis used against the invader, and the Israeli agents making deals with the Egyptians with whom they recently signed a peace treaty, we, and they, could not have won.

The weapons were delivered to the Tajik Northern Alliance. Very few went to Osama bin Laden’s Pashtun and Taliban muahajadeen. The film makes that clear. And those who believe otherwise believe in myth-making.

In fact, it was Ronald Reagan who was the power behind crushing the Soviets. It was he who signed the orders and underwrote the money transfers. That is just history, and it cannot be re-written no matter how “uncomfortable” some have become with the idea of the Republican president “winning” the Third World War.

And it was Oliver North who, standing tall, hand raised to swear in, resourcefully, brilliantly and defiantly stood up to a disingenuous and phony Democrat Congress that tried to crush him and punish Reagan for what they too, in their hearts, supported. The whole military and the intelligence community view North as the genuine American hero that he is.

And we as a Nation honor him and his President to this day.

The Soviet invasion and the American response had a far different context decades ago than it would have had these days. Carter, almost comatose, lost almost forty nations to Soviet-funded and inspired insurgency and domination. Reagan recovered these same nations and many others — including all of Eastern and Southern Europe — to civilization.

Ayn Rand, who happens to know because she lived there, as I have, observed that communism AND socialism stinks in theory AND in practice.

I say, those who haven’t walked the walk have NO opinion.

Comment by Russ — December 23, 2007 @ 6:24 pm

I wish I could believe that, but with the sociopaths that have been in charge all too often over the years, I’m afraid they aren;t worth the benefit of the doubt.

The US has done some things unwarranted but the cluster bombs that looked like food was not an intentional thing.

Thanks for the info. Yes I don’t think there is a whole heck of a lot of difference between Democrats and Republicans in the big picture. Lyndon Johnson was a Democrat. Holy Crap!

Interesting stuff on Carter. I wonder if the old sniper rifles were a very small contribution, more or less a political move to please as many people as possible.

We need to dig up Ronnie’s corpse, cuz of how great he wuz.

In any case, the supposed Islamic extremist don’t need to send terrorists to the USA. They have Bush and Cheney JUNTA doing a great job in destroying what was once a beacon of light has become a black hole.

Comment by sacopenapa — December 23, 2007 @ 2:34 pm

Such a good job in fact that Bin Laden dropped out of the competition.

Why have there been no attacks since 9/11? Because (a) they would be woefully puny compared to what BushCo can do to America (b) they would be redundant (you don’t kill an enemy who is busy committing suicide) and (c) they could be counter-productive in that an attack by Al Qaeda could add cement to the Coalition of the Dwindling.

Talk about “Heck of A Job”.

Comment by Russ — December 23, 2007 @ 12:08 pm

Good thing America never painted cluster bombs to look like food packets.

When have you ever known a Republican to actually ever do something properly?

That said, Afghanistan, well something had to be done. Getting involved was the right thing to do, where he failed was, as you said, abandoning the monster when it was no longer useful.

Helping Afghanistan was not the problem. The problem was that they did it by creating a monster — and then abandoned it.

Comment by toasterhead — December 23, 2007 @ 11:50 am

And being Americans, always “looking forward”, we never look back to learn from past mistakes. Creating monsters for short-term goals, even if they come back and take a big bite out of our ass later on seems to be the “American Way”: Meet the New Bin Laden.

Comment by Bruce Gorton — December 23, 2007 @ 11:38 am

Helping Afghanistan was not the problem. The problem was that they did it by creating a monster — and then abandoned it.

He got into power by slamming Carter for being too soft on Iran, and then promptly sold Iran weapons.

His first term was an economic disaster, and his second term saw him hiking taxes via eliminating tax loopholes and raising income taxes on the poor. You see, he wasn’t in favour of the rich, who could better afford it, actually paying any more at the time.

His presidency saw America go from being the world’s biggest creditor to being in major debt, and his contribution to world politics was basically being in the right place at the right time when the Soviet Union imploded.

His name is also tied to genocide.

That he operated in a moral grey area by helping a country, which would later go on to be somewhat terrible, defend itself from a foreign agressor is the least of his sins. In fact, going on what was known at the time, one could argue that helping Afghanistan was the right thing to do.

Thanks to Kilo for trying to manhandle that major league ignoramus.

Kilo is, of course, correct (in #41) that the CIA never directly funded Osama.

Why does none of this mention that it was Carter who first sent the old British sniper rifles into Afghanistan? Charlie Wilson doesn’t mention it.

And by the way, Reagan did serve in WWII, but not right away, and he only served in the First Motion Picture Unit. As a B movie actor, that was probably appropriate.

Not that this is entirely relevant, but since many people are talking about Reagan’s WWII era service, people should really take the time to see “The Sante Fe Trail” (released 1941 starring Flynn/Reagan) and “King’s Row” (released 1942, starring Reagan).

The first movie is a racist’s rewrite of the story of John Brown.

The second movie seems very much like pro-peace-with-the-Nazis propaganda if you really think about it, in the context of the time. Reagan waxes on about peaceful Europe. They get away with it by making it a period piece.

Anyway, this is a nice blog, but the commenting needs some editing.

Put up a fight for what? You righties seem to think sending other people’s kids to fight for our “freedoms” is somehow honorable. It isn’t. Send the forces when it is necessary. But you guys don’t care about the poor bastards dying for your ideology, do you?