McCain: Bush ‘Exactly Right’ On ‘Appeasement’ Remark, Praises Reagan’s Handling Of Iran Hostage Crisis
McCain: Bush ‘Exactly Right’ On ‘Appeasement’ Remark, Praises Reagan’s Handling Of Iran Hostage Crisis
Referring to President Bush’s notorious comments, MSNBC’s Pat Buchanan asked this morning: Will Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) “endorse this statement about Barack Obama that in effect he is an appeaser?” Today, McCain confirmed that he would.
The New York Times reports that McCain “wholeheartedly endorsed Mr. Bush’s veiled rebuke” at Obama. Talking to reporters this morning, McCain said:
Yes, there have been appeasers in the past, and the president is exactly right, and one of them is Neville Chamberlain. I believe that it’s not an accident that our hostages came home from Iran when President Reagan was president of the United States. He didn’t sit down in a negotiation with the religious extremists in Iran, he made it very clear that those hostages were coming home.
McCain elaborated on his campaign bus today, claiming diplomatic talks are a “serious error.” Watch it:
McCain’s praise of Ronald Reagan is wholly misplaced. To recap, during the Iran-Contra affair in the 1980s, hostages were not released because of Iran’s fear of Reagan, as McCain suggested. In reality, Iran released them after Reagan administration officials infamously sold arms to the country, which were transfered to Ayatollah Khomeini. As a result, 11 Reagan officials were convicted of crimes.
Furthermore, Reagan did not have to “negotiate” with Iran during the hostage crisis of the 1970s because he wasn’t involved in it. The extensive negotiations with Iran were done before his presidency. In fact, Reagan’s inauguration occurred only minutes before the hostages were released.
McCain should take note of what Reagan said in 1981: “Our reluctance for conflict should not be misjudged as a failure of will.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
83 Responses to “McCain: Bush ‘Exactly Right’ On ‘Appeasement’ Remark, Praises Reagan’s Handling Of Iran Hostage Crisis”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Yep - when in doubt, glorify the Culture of Corruption. It IS the Rethuglican way.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:28 pm“Yes, my friends, I’m going to feed you a whole plateful of sh*t and call it chocolate! Enjoy it, my friends!”
Good grief.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:31 pmDid McCain talk to Bushes Grandpa Prescott about Appeasement?
May 15th, 2008 at 4:32 pmYep- and be sure to make false statements with confidence. What Reagan did to get our guys back was called treason. He gave arms to our enemies to make a political score. Not all of us are too young to remember those days, nor too senile to remember them correctly!
May 15th, 2008 at 4:32 pmYup, Rove’s his political advisor. This is pure Rove, trying to rebrand a traitor as heroic.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:33 pmMcCain’s praise of Ronald Reagan is wholly misplaced. To recap, during the Iran-Contra affair in the 1980s, hostages were not released because of Iran’s fear of Reagan, as McCain suggested. In reality, Iran released them after Reagan administration officials infamously sold arms to the country, which were transfered to Ayatollah Khomeini. As a result, 11 Reagan officials were convicted of crimes.
To paraphrase, Reagan not only talked to terrorists, he sold them weapons that may be being used against our troops in Iraq right now. Another successful Republican initiative.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:33 pmhey McPutz; FYI: Ronnie Ray-gun sold weapons to terrorists and gave the profits to other terrorists- the Contras.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:35 pmKind of like how bush is paying warlords not to shoot at us now?
May 15th, 2008 at 4:36 pmThis will make fine meat for a presidential debate. Let’s get Mctraitorlover on record in a debate, and then have Obama set the record straight (if he can bring himself to criticize Reagan).
May 15th, 2008 at 4:36 pmLooking like BS Express talker is losing wheels everyday.
Memo to McCain: Keep talking about the Reagan-Iran hostage era because that era brings back memories of Daddy Bush’s connection with Iran-Contra affair and Ollie North.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:37 pmJohnny Boy has just erased whatever doubt might have been out there about his inability to grasp facts (and reality) and proved his senility is worse than we imagined.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:37 pmGood going mccain just keep those remarks acoming and you will talk yourself out of the 28% chance of getting elected.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:37 pmAppease? You mean like being afraid to call your buddies in Saudi Arabia on all of their international funding of terrorism, including the Iraqi insurgents? Would that be the kind of appeasement you were thinking of Bushie?
Wow, the projection, and hypocrisy among these republican wingnuts is astonishingly INSANE!
May 15th, 2008 at 4:39 pmThis is a prime example of McCain’s “lost bearings.” So worn, they’ve dropped out, and the gears are about to seize up.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:41 pmSome weapons into Iran had to do with that praiseful handling of the hostage situation…
Oh, and all the drugs smuggled and sold into poor black neighborhoods right from Central and South America by CIA-Contra fellas.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:41 pmGeorge W. Ego is unwilling to sit on the sidelines. He is so childish and needy that he will continue to insert himself into the political debates and force the moronic GOP lemmings to embrace every stupid utterance.
McCain is falling for it, being the moron that he is.
On the heels of the MS-01 election where it was determined that the GOP should start stepping away from Bush, Bush the ego-baby makes every GOP tool embrace his toxic gibberish.
Keep it up.
-GSD
May 15th, 2008 at 4:42 pmAnd yet, and yet, McCain will get likely get 40-45% of the popular vote on November 4th. People will ignore, overlook, misunderstand, re-interpret, NOT HAVE A CLUE about these things. Yikes. Can’t have a real democracy without an educated, well informed public that believes in community–local and global community.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:42 pmReagan’s team, in the fall of 1980, made a deal with the terrorist state of Iran not to release the hostages from the US embassy in Tehran in a deal with Carter, but to wait until after Reagan was sworn in. In exchange, the US would sell them massive amounts of weaponry. The deal was for about $1 billion worth, but had to be cut short after about $200 million when two plane crashes revealed what was happening. About 1200 TOW milles were included.
The official story is the weapons were in exchange for the hostages in Beirut, but this is a lie since the weapons were sent before they were taken.
Also, Carter had sanctions against any trading with Saddam, but Reagan ended those and immediately began aiding Saddam.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:42 pmKeith O. must just be rubbing his hands together — his whole show tonight was written for him in about 3 hours by Chimpy, Lie-bernutjob and McSame…
May 15th, 2008 at 4:44 pmRight on, Keith@18! Carter brokered the deal to release the hostages, NOT Reagan! Check out Haynes Johnson’s “Sleepwalking Through History” for details.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:44 pmYou know I heard Aricept is good for the beginings of senility. Should I send that along to mccain’s website you think ?
May 15th, 2008 at 4:46 pmThese things are so far removed from daily American life right now. Every American, Democrat and Republican alike, knows that in an emergency we can kick Iran’s ass and anyone else’s ass for that matter. But by now every American also knows that Republicans keep shady friends and they have absolutely ZERO authority to bash Americans this way. Keep it up. Just keep on hating Americans and calling us Hamas.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:47 pmUhmmm I heard also that Carter was furious with Reagon because Reagon pulled strings and didn’t get the hostages released until after he was sworn in. Think daddy bush was involved in that one.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:47 pmRed Pill, the most definitive book is OCTOBER SURPRISE by Gary Sick (National Security Council under Ford, Carter, and Reagan).
May 15th, 2008 at 4:48 pmGrampy McSame says - My friends, back in the day we had Ronnie, we all loved his movies, he was real pleasing to watch, we would go to the theater and eat pop corn and juju candy, then i ran down the isle to get some more pleasing candy but they had buffalo in there, so i ran the other way which was a pleasing thing to do back then…I think I have a melted snickers bar in my pants.
My gosh grampy, Ronnie cut a deal with Iran with weapons so that they would hold the hostages long enough to get him elected, your spin on it is easy to debunk.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:49 pmTexas lady, That’s right and yes he was—plus future CIA head Casey.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:50 pmOh, and by the way — somebody better remind McSame that after Ronny Ray-gun sold the arms to Iran to free the hostages (thereby appeasing the Ayatollah), he diverted those proceeds to the Contras in Nicaragua (thereby appeasing Central American terrorists) who were fighting to overthrow the Nicaraguan government of Daniel Ortega.
Anybody know who was re-elected president of Nicaragua not too long ago? That’s right, class — Daniel Ortega. So Nicaragua is right back where it started, before Ronny Ray-gun appeased terrorists in two countries, showing yet again the utter failure of repuglican intervention in international affairs.
Yep — McSame sure is using the right set of facts to support his lost-bearings worldview, ain’t he???
May 15th, 2008 at 4:50 pmYes, need to get MoveOn.org to make an ad recalling every single time the Repubs “appeased” (or worse) terrorists and bad guys. Clip showing Bush’s appeasement statement, then a dozen little clips of Iran/Contra, negotiating with Taliban over oil pipeline just prior to Sept. 11th, Bush kissing Saudi king, paying Iraqi Awakening Councils, etc, etc. Would be a PERFECT ad.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:50 pmThis is what Bush actually said:
Democrats seem a little apprehensive at this. No names were mentioned and Democrats have favored negotiating to Bush’s brand of dipomacy (or lack there of).
Where’s the disconnect.
Do you support Obama (or Democrats) in general trying to negotiate where Bush has not?
May 15th, 2008 at 4:57 pmKeith@24: I know the title; I’ll have to give it a read. Thanks for the rec!
May 15th, 2008 at 5:00 pmPlease see comment #58 under Perino concerning a real act of appeasement ala Chamberlain. Yes, we need to fully publicize the act of appeasement and the treasonous actions of Reagan. We shoud also make an issue of a presidential candidate conducting foreign policy with a foreign power while a candidate and prior to taking office. Was not McCain a senator at the time? Did he not know of the illegal appeasement by Reagan? Will the Democrats really have the balls to raise this as an issue?
May 15th, 2008 at 5:01 pmBackup, everybody knows it is referring to Obama saying there could be talks with Iran.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:01 pmThe Israelis have been negotiating with Hamas thru Egyptian Back Channels for years. They’d be stupid not to, since Hamas is holding an Israeli prisoner.
They just don’t CALL it negotiating.!
May 15th, 2008 at 5:01 pmbackup Says:
Do you support Obama (or Democrats) in general trying to negotiate where Bush has not?
“Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.” –JFK
Not only is this more civilized but demonstrably more effective than trying to blast people into accepting your opinion. Bush has had his chance to prove his “strategy” works and has only succeeded in creating an endless war.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:01 pmThe thread set up is twisting McCains words, though I am sure it is purely accidental. This phrase
I believe that it’s not an accident that our hostages came home from Iran when President Reagan was president of the United States. He didn’t sit down in a negotiation with the religious extremists in Iran, he made it very clear that those hostages were coming home.
was to my reading in reference to the Embassy hostages held for 400 days during the Carter Admin. Indeed, Reagan did not negotiate for their return as he was not President during their captivity but as President elect “made it very clear that those hostages were coming home.” They were indeed returned minutes into his Presidency; considering Reagans know bellicosity it stands to reason that Khoemeni realized it was time to give up the hostages or he would be item one on the new Presidents list and it wasn’t going to be good for his Revolution.
Think about it: If McCain is arguing against appeasement, why would he be citing Iran-contra when that was inexcusable appeasment? The logic behind TP’s summary is non-existant.
Iran-Contra was very bad, so please no one jump down my throat on that point. I am simply saying TP’s spin on McCains remarks make no sense on their face.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:02 pmI want to thank all of you here. It truly makes me feel hopeful when I see so many people who can think for themselves and who can handle the truth.
xo
May 15th, 2008 at 5:03 pmKeltoi, try reading my post @18. It is absolutely true. Gary Sick was on the NSC under Ford, Carter, and Reagan.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:05 pmBackup, you either need to read farther or quote more honestly. You conveniently left out some parts.
Do you want to defend these comments? Would you deny he has made a conscious effort to equate dissenters in this country (including Obama) with those who “appeased” Nazis? Would you like to tell us who “some people” (typical cheap wingnut rhetoric) who urge breaking ties with Israel?
In your attempts to bend over backward to prove that, really, Republicans and “conservatives” are just people, you constantly stray from honesty.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:06 pmKeltoi, the arms deal did not start for the Beirut hostages, but for the Tehran hostages. The deal was made in early Fall of 1980—long before the Beirut hostages were taken.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:07 pmIt was just a few short months ago that Rush Limbaugh quietly whispered on his radio show that the Iraq war was really about Iran. And look what has happened since then. Bombing Iran has become daily discussion.
Look how easily we have been lured into a false debate about “bombing Iran”. Should Obama even be talking about talking to Iran in this context before ever even questioning the validity of the threats to begin with?
May 15th, 2008 at 5:07 pmconsidering Reagans know bellicosity it stands to reason that Khoemeni realized it was time to give up the hostages or he would be item one on the new Presidents list and it wasn’t going to be good for his Revolution.
This was right before the eight year Iran Iraq War, with a MILLION Dead Iranians and the first use of poison gas since world war II. Reagan HELPed the Iraqi’s…remember Rumsfeld’s infamous handshake. It’s a good thing that Khomeni made nice to Reagan, or Reagan might have really Punished them.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:10 pmJebus, Keltoi, sometimes, I really do think you’re stupid.
STOP DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:13 pmCNN poll of polls today: Obama 48%, McCain 43%.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:13 pmIt seem McCain also thought it was a “neat idea”
May 15th, 2008 at 5:14 pmIt’s all well and good for us to continue to reveal the truth to each other…. but it doesn’t mean spit until the mainstream media gets off their collective a**es and report on McCain’s distortion of history.
We’re all preaching to the choir here (except for the trolls, who are just trying to justify their existance). Until the American Public hears about it, its meaningless, no matter that its the truth.
If we could just have Ryan Seacrest say what we’ve all been saying, McCain wouldn’t have a chance.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:16 pmKeltoi Says:
was to my reading in reference to the Embassy hostages held for 400 days during the Carter Admin. Indeed, Reagan did not negotiate for their return as he was not President during their captivity but as President elect “made it very clear that those hostages were coming home.” They were indeed returned minutes into his Presidency; considering Reagans know bellicosity it stands to reason that Khoemeni realized it was time to give up the hostages or he would be item one on the new Presidents list and it wasn’t going to be good for his Revolution.
That’s an intriguing interpretation, although you really need to stretch to make it fit. How many minutes after the Reagan inauguration were the hostages released? It passes belief that this happened because Khomeni was worried about Reagan’s bellicosity and far more likely that (illegal) negotiations had been going on through 1980, especially given what followed with Iran Contra. The very idea of Reagan’s “bellicosity” is a joke, Keltoi. Where was that “bellicosity” after the bombing of Marines in Lebanon? How “bellicose” was he when he chose to invade Grenada?
May 15th, 2008 at 5:18 pmKeltoi, I realize very well that Reagan was not president in early Fall, 1980, but his team negotiated the arms deal. They including William Casey (US intelligence since WWII), GHWB (CIA since early 1960’s), Edwin Meese, Richard Allen, and Jamshid Hashemi.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:22 pmKeltoi says:
Think about it: If McCain is arguing against appeasement, why would he be citing Iran-contra when that was inexcusable appeasment? The logic behind TP’s summary is non-existant.
Iran-Contra was very bad, so please no one jump down my throat on that point. I am simply saying TP’s spin on McCains remarks make no sense on their face.
Ahh, but that’s the very point, isn’t it Keltoi? McSame’s own words make no sense on their face, because in trying to argue against appeasement, he’s citing an explicit act of dual-continent appeasement by the Reagan administration.
The point being made here is that, like the current adminstration that’s infesting the White House, McSame throws out an argument and then tries to support it using lies, hypocrisy, nonsense or faulty logic, or combinations of all of them — probably because like BushCo, he’s assuming the American voting public will be too stupid to try to understand and will just accept his BS on face value. I, on the other hand, have a little more faith in the intelligence of my fellow citizens — the past two general elections notwithstanding…
May 15th, 2008 at 5:26 pmLeftside Annie Says:
STOP DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE.
An odd statement from a gal who started today going to bat for Sean Penn ;)
I am out of time guys, I read your rebuttals but can’t make one myself, sorry, til next time.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:28 pmKeltoi Says:
An odd statement from a gal who started today going to bat for Sean Penn ;)
May 15th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
___
Obviously you’ve never seen Mystic River.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:31 pm“Perhaps we didn’t appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the Marines’ safety that it should have. In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believed the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 Marines would be alive today.”
Ronald Reagan
“People do not make wars; governments do.” Ronald Reagan
May 15th, 2008 at 5:32 pmI believe that it’s not an accident that our hostages came home from Iran when President Reagan was president of the United States. He didn’t sit down in a negotiation with the religious extremists in Iran, he made it very clear that those hostages were coming home.
What a tool! Reagan cut a deal with Iran to sell them weapons if they’d hold on to the hostages until AFTER the election. So not only was he playing politics with the lives of the hostages, but he was also selling weapons to the enemy. The former is amoral opportunism; the later is TREASON.
Obviously it’s not in the Repugs’ best interest to highlight St. Ronnie’s perfidy, but McSame — like most Repugs — isn’t bright enough to connect the dots.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:32 pmReagon admitted arms were exchanged for hostages…there is a video on google if you care to check.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:34 pmhussein toasterhead Says:
——————————————————————————–
Keltoi Says:
An odd statement from a gal who started today going to bat for Sean Penn ;)
May 15th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
___
Obviously you’ve never seen Mystic River.
He is an awesome actor, she was defending his intellect, check Thinkfast @ around 44 or so for some great Wisdom of Penn, I think you’ll agree with me.
Now, I MUST go. Ciao!
May 15th, 2008 at 5:35 pmGuido the Loving OBGYN Says:
Look how easily we have been lured into a false debate about “bombing Iran”. Should Obama even be talking about talking to Iran in this context before ever even questioning the validity of the threats to begin with?
May 15th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
______
Obama should absolutely be talking about talking to Iran, no matter what the context. The fact is that Iran is a major player in the Persian Gulf, in Iraq, in Central Asia, and in the price of oil. Iran is in dire economic conditions and Ahmedinejad is facing a very likely defeat in the upcoming 2009 elections. Obama absolutely should be talking about talking to Iran and improving our relations with the country, rather than taking the easy route and threatening annihilation.
I do wish he’d stop propagating the “wipe Israel off the map” myth, though.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:37 pmhussein toasterhead Says:
Obviously you’ve never seen Mystic River.
It’s hard to go wrong with a Dennis Lehane story. Hell, even Ben Affleck pulled it off.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:38 pmNo disrespect to Sean Penn but Tim Robbins got hosed. He should have won the award Penn did.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:41 pmKeltoi: You are one of the reasons that the United States has become so screwed up. Even Reagan admitted that there had been an arms for hostage agreement with Iran to secure the release of the hostages. Reagan actually did conduct negotiations with the Iranians before assuming the presidency. A number of his staff were convicted for crimes in carrying out the trade. It seems that Reagan really was nothing more than filthy scum betraying the values that you so proudly seem to believe in.
Now a word about Keltoi: This person seems to believe in fantasies or has some serious delusions. What kind of international reputation did Reagan have. For God’s sake, he was B movie actor and former governor of California. You have to believe that with a background like this, that Reagan actually caused the Iranians to pi** in their pants. The true story Keltoi is that there is a long history of Republicans being nothing more than traitors to their country. Let us look at a couple of examples:
Oh, the Bush family. Was it not the father of old man Bush that helped finance the Nazi’s until his company’s assets were seized by FDR’s government?
Oh, that congressman mentioned in the Bush speech saying that we could have convinced Hitler to change his ways, another filthy, treasonous Republican.
Hey, Reagan - we already covered a part of his Iranian connection. Remember, he also sold stuff to help his contras in South America by selling weapons to a known terrorist nation and an enemy to the United States in order to fund a guerilla war as specifically prohibited by the law of our land. What a wonderful patriot.
Bush I: Not so innocent in Iran Contra. Also helped appease Saddam Hussein while serving under Reagan and prior to Saddam’s decision to invade for oil that brought us Gulf I. Indeed, Rummy was a great ally to Saddam before he became his enemy.
Bush II: Yes, there was that wonderful deal he has worked out with Pakistan that pays their government so much while they give AQ sanctuary. Yes, Bush II got so much when Pakistan tried, convicted and punished (?) that nuclear scientist who helped spread nuclear knowledge across the globe.
Oh, yes - Negotiations with N. Korea, Syria, and Iran carried out by the State Department and sanctioned by DoD.
Face it, Republicans are scum. They lie, violate the law and do whatever else they believe will keep them in power.
Well your time is up. We are going to come after these filth and treat them like the scum that they are.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:44 pmThe history books will record W as the worst president ever. And Reagan as the most overrated president ever. And these right wing tools only remember the parts of the Reagan legacy that make him sound like a decent leader. What about the 100+ times he answered that he couldn’t remember at the Iran Contra hearings. Nixon, Reagan, W, one crime after the next that has brought us to this sad place. And who has been pulling strings the whole time George Herbert Walker, losing the second election is not the only part of his legacy that needs to be evaluated.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:51 pmStrange - we take medals back for Olympic winners when finding they lied about using drugs, even jail time. But who did they really hurt ? But Presidents, V.P.’s get executive priviledge for lying, ruining, selling off the country they supposedly are working for. Something wrong with this picture.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:57 pmJMOHR - there are many Keltois now, untouched by the economy, the war, life is good for them. No wonder they relish their time now. Wait a year, the deficit will really hit home and the Keltois will blame it on the newly elected Democrat President.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:04 pmYes, there have been appeasers in the past, and the president is exactly right, and one of them is Neville Chamberlain. I believe that it’s not an accident that our hostages came home from Iran when President Reagan was president of the United States. He didn’t sit down in a negotiation with the religious extremists in Iran, he made it very clear that those hostages were coming home.
But it took a Dem , sitting in a wheelchair no less , to win the biggest threat to freedom that the world has ever seen ; that McJowels chooses to try and (erroneously) heap praise upon Ronnie Retard , just reveals how typically Republican and therefore dishonest he truly is…………
May 15th, 2008 at 6:13 pmThe Pukes have two ‘issues’: fear-mongering and faux-patriotic militarism. Fear is, still, I believe, a HUGE reservoir of vote-swinging momentum, and the Pukes have the inside track on it. Their attacks on either HRC or BHO will trade on fears–social phobias, really. Throw a little ‘terror’ buzz, and another war, some immigration (xenophobia), gay marriage (homophobia), and the underlying cling to God and guns, and you got it: FEAR RULZ!
anyway, i can see how it could…
And,unfortunately, the Pukes are in the position to manipulate events and perceptions of them in ways that accentuate those ‘issues’ in ways that support their agenda.
that is to say, it could work
May 15th, 2008 at 6:25 pmCan’t wait for Sen. Ted Kennedy to comment on this flap. He should know, after all Amb. to England Joseph Kennedy Sr., his daddy, was also a Hitler appeaser.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:27 pmPretty much since the Punic Wars, at anyrate, conflicts conclude with negotiations. I cannot think of any since certainly since the beginning of the last century which didn’t.
To the uninitiated, this means that principals in the matters under violent dispute were required to sidt down, face to face, with their ‘enemies’, their antagonists.
Has there been a single non-negotiated peace in the last 100–or eve 500–years? I don’t think so.
But to know anything about that, you’d have had to have studied history a little, and considerably more than the amount of history students are taught in school below the graduate level in university.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:37 pmOne could make the argument that Reagan was an appeaser because he illegally sold weapons to Iran and used the money to secretly fund the contras.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:43 pmGH Bush was the VP at the time.
And as for an association with the Nazis, Prescott Bush (W’s grandpa) was a collaborator, and a war profiteer.
It is poats like this that make us look stupid. Iran/Contra happened well after the hostage crisis.
May 15th, 2008 at 7:32 pmAnd poor spelling like me!
May 15th, 2008 at 7:33 pmJMOHR - please allow me to add another example (to your most excellent #58) of fine Republican “patriotism” when it comes to dealing with thos evil ‘terrists’ and their “axis of evil” countries:
As CEO of Halliburton, Mr. Cheney lobbied the Clinton administration to ease sanctions on Libya and Iran, according to various news reports. “I think we’d be better off if we, in fact, backed off those sanctions [on Iran], didn’t try to impose secondary boycotts on companies .. trying to do business there,” Cheney told an Australian television interviewer in April 1998.3
According to the Financial Times, before he was elected (but after he resigned from Halliburton) Cheney “has said the company is allowed to operate legally in Iran through its foreign subsidiaries.”4 “What we do with respect to Iran and Libya is done through foreign subsidiaries, totally in compliance with US law,” Cheney told ABC Television’s Sam Donaldson. When Donaldson suggested, “it’s a way around US law,” Cheney replied: “No, no, it’s provided for us specifically with respect to Iran and Libya.”5 If you’re a big multinational that’s able to incorporate around the world, you don’t have to worry…
http://halliburtonwatch.org/about_hal/iran.html
May 15th, 2008 at 8:18 pm1934: The Plot Against America
May 15th, 2008 at 9:24 pmThe Congressional committee kept the names of many of the participants under wraps and no criminal action was ever brought against them. But a few names have leaked out. And one is Prescott Bush, the grandfather of the incumbent president. Prescott Bush was of course deep into the business of the Hamburg-America Lines, and had tight relations throughout this period with the new Government that had come to power in Germany a year earlier under Chancellor Adolph Hitler. It appears that Bush was to have formed a key liaison for the group with the new German government.
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/07/hbc-90000651
When Bush (or McCain) comments that Obama is an appeaser, like Neville Chamberline was to Hitler, Bush is speaking with authority since Bush himself, like Hitler knew how to take advantage of appeasers —- as Bush has been doing with the entire Democratic Party for more than five years to advance the interests of his own Nazi-like, corporatist/fascist Empire.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:11 pmI’m sure this is mentioned up thread, but the hostages were released long before the Reagan administration sold arms to Iran. Your post implies that you believe that Reagan administration officials managed to sell arms to Iran in the minutes which elapsed between the inauguration and the release.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:16 pmrobert.waldmann Says:
I’m sure this is mentioned up thread, but the hostages were released long before the Reagan administration sold arms to Iran. Your post implies that you believe that Reagan administration officials managed to sell arms to Iran in the minutes which elapsed between the inauguration and the release.
I guess you’re just pulling this out of your ***, is this just some foggy recollection of yours? I guess this is just one more thing where the facts have a liberal bias eh? But facts are not something that interests republicans. The only things that turn your crank are hate, intolerance, war, bigotry, power, and money.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair
May 15th, 2008 at 10:39 pmDoes McCain also praise Reagan for putting the Marines in Beruit, Lebanon only to have them blown up by a truck bomb, where upon Reagan pulled the Marines out of Lebanon.
Some of us think Reagan was hasty in putting the Marines in but made the right decision to pull them back out. Where do you stand on that issue John McCain?
May 15th, 2008 at 11:44 pmwallyqc Says:
It is poats like this that make us look stupid. Iran/Contra happened well after the hostage crisis.
May 15th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
There were hostages taken in Tehran and released 444 days later when Reagan took the oath of office. But there were also hostages taken working in Beirut at later dates. The official story is the arms-for-hostages trading was for the Beirut group. But the airplane parts shipments from Israel to Iran began before the Tehran group were released. And weapons shipments happened early in RR’s presidency, before the Beirut ones were taken. Once again, read OCTOBER SURPRISE by Gary Sick (NSC under Ford, Carter, and Reagan).
May 16th, 2008 at 2:51 amIran sure does seem to have gotten this country’s goat. It goes all the way back to the CIA’s overthrow of Mohammed Mosaddeq, a democratically elected president. Were’re still paying the price for that.
Ever since Khomeni and the ‘79 revolution, Americans and Israelis have been as obsessed with Iran as mother would be with a two-headed baby.
America’s self-rightous indignation with Iran is highly suspicious. It comes off more as a spoiled child who’s been disciplined and now has sworn revenge, to get even.
Iran has a s much right to have a peaceful nuclear industry as any other country. They are entitled to that right by the United Nations. Only the Israelis and Americans don’t like it. Both countries are warmongering to give us an excuse to attack Iran. They don’t need approval, just an excuse.
I’m fully expecting another false flag operation like 9/11. I hope elements within our military are ready to seize control..to get rid of Bush and friends…if such an attack occurs.
Americans will not accept another con job from George W. Bush.
I hope this issue divides Americans from Israel, as it should.
May 16th, 2008 at 3:08 amKilo: A waste of time and space. I’m not impressed with your superior attitude around here.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:59 amI wish people would stop thinking they could reason with this William Buckley wannabe.
take care
tony and guidedog Lido
Thats good, my late guidedog had more class than you ever will
May 16th, 2008 at 10:42 amtake care
tony andguidedog Lido
ps thats it with you, you’re not worth the time and effort.
keep supporting the war criminal bush.
FU
May 16th, 2008 at 11:09 amI guess it is all right to sell massive amounts of weaponry illegally to a terrorist Islamic state that is holding your citizens hostage IF YOU ARE REPUBLICAN!
May 16th, 2008 at 11:30 ami typically don’t respond to trolls, but kilo almost makes a point here.
it’s possible, perhaps likely, that the weapons we’ve sold to *numerous* countries over the decades, legitimately or otherwise, and know to us or otherwise, are not currently killing our troops. fair enough. but i don’t think it negates the point that Namtillaku might have been trying to make, which is that we were dealing with these people, often illicitly, often supplying them with weapons when it served our political purposes, and then denounce them when *that* serves our political purposes. same reason the mujahedeen fell out of love with us.
May 16th, 2008 at 7:14 pmProgressives don’t lie about it, Republicans do. And McCain is praising Iran/Contra.
May 19th, 2008 at 6:03 am“Appeasers” who have caught hell from the far right:
John F. Kennedy for promising not to invade Cuba if missiles were withdrawn by Russia
Dwight D. Eisenhower for inviting Khrushchev to the United States
Ronald Reagan for reaching arms control agreement with Gorbachev
Obama for even suggeting talking with our foes
“Appeasers” who have not caught hell from the far right:
George W. Bush for talking and negotiating with Libya, North Korea and Iran
May 21st, 2008 at 3:55 pm