 |
As far as I recall Reagan didn't send his minions out to lie and protect his a$$ to get reelected. He also challenged Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin wall, precipitated the collapse of the Eastern Bloc and won the cold war. Obama can't even keep his feet out of his mouth.
Let's see the score sheet on war
WWII tick
Korean War??
Vietnam
Cold War tick
War on poverty
War on terror
War on drugs
War in Iraq tick
Well three out of eight ain't bad
You're comparing election campaigns to the Iranian hostages, and 300 dead and wounded American service men?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
DUDE??
As I recall ,Reagan did not blame the bombing on an anti-Mohammed video... or try to cover up the circumstances of the bombing to the American people.
Beirut Memorial On Line - History | Reagan's SpeechQuote:
A little over a year ago hoping to build on the Camp David accords, which had led to peace between Israel and Egypt, I proposed a peace plan for the Middle East to end the wars between the Arab States and Israel- It was based on U.N. resolutions 242 and 338 and called for a fair and just solution to the Palestinian problem, as well as a fair and just settlement of issues between the Arab States and Israel.
Before the necessary negotiations could begin, it was essential to get all foreign forces out of Lebanon and to end the fighting there. So, why are we there? Well, the answer is straightforward: to help bring peace to Lebanon and stability to the vital Middle East. To that end, the multinational force was created to help stabilize the situation in Lebanon until a government could be established and a Lebanese army mobilized to restore Lebanese sovereignty over its own soil as the foreign forces withdrew. Israel agreed to withdraw as did Syria, but Syria then reneged on its promise. Over 10,000 Palestinians who had been bringing ruin down on Beirut, however, did leave the country.
Lebanon has formed a government under the leadership of President Gemayal, and that government, with our assistance and training, has set up its own army. In only a year's time, that army has been rebuilt. It's a good army, composed of Lebanese of all factions.
A few weeks ago, the Israeli army pulled back to the Awali River in southern Lebanon. Despite fierce resistance by Syrian-backed forces, the Lebanese army was able to hold the line and maintain the defensive perimeter around Beirut.
In the year that our Marines have been there, Lebanon has made important steps toward stability and order. The physical presence of the Marines lends support to both the Lebanese Government and its army. It allows the hard work of diplomacy to go forward. Indeed, without the peacekeepers from the U.S. France, Italy, and Britain, the efforts to find a peaceful solution in Lebanon would collapse.
As to that narrower question - what exactly is the operational mission of the Marines- the answer is, to secure a piece of Beirut, to keep order in their sector, and to prevent the area from becoming a battlefield. Our Marines are not just sitting in an airport. Part of their task is to guard that airport. Because of their presence, the airport has remained operational. In addition, they patrol the surrounding area. This is their part - a limited, but essential part - in the larger effort that I've described.
If our Marines must be there, I'm asked, why can't we make them safer? Who committed this latest atrocity against them and why?
Well, we'll do everything we can to ensure that our men are as safe as possible. We ordered the battleship New Jersey to join our naval forces offshore. Without even firing them, the threat of its 16-inch guns silenced those who once fired down on our Marines from the hills, and they're a good part of the reason we suddenly had a cease fire. We're doing our best to make our forces less vulnerable to those who want to snipe at them or send in future suicide missions.
Yes Beirut was bad and eventually we bugged out . But Reagan did not try to cover it up or lie about the circumstances. The American people knew why we were there .
Nice speech by Reagan, but...
1983 Beirut barracks bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This was after the Iran Contra affair. I guess you are trying to equate Benghazi as the president's Lebanon/Iran/Watergate/Lewinski scandal. Or trying to get your early digs into Hillary's presidential hopes.Quote:
The U.S. Marines were moved offshore where they could not be targeted. On February 7, 1984, President Reagan ordered the marines to begin withdrawing from Lebanon. Their withdrawal was completed on February 26, four months after the barracks bombing; the rest of the multinational force was withdrawn by April 1984.
We will see how explosive the House hearings are tomorrow.
Benghazi outrage muted at Libya nominee's hearing - CNN.com
Benghazi Will Totally Be 'The Next Watergate' Unless It Isn't
Iran Contra didn't begin until the summer of 1985
Can't see why anyone would have an issue with Deborah Jones nomination. She is well qualified for the posting .
Quote:
Amb. Jones is the former U.S. ambassador to Kuwait (2008-2011). She is a career member of the Senior Foreign Service, having been with the Department of State since 1982. Prior to her assignment as Ambassador, she served as Principal Officer at the U.S. Consulate General in Istanbul, Turkey. Her previous overseas assignments include: Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates; Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; Baghdad, Iraq; Buenos Aires, Argentina; and Damascus, Syria. Her service in Washington, D.C. includes two years as country director of the Office of Arabian Peninsula and Iran Affairs in addition to assignments as staff assistant to Assistant Secretary for Near East and South Asia Affairs Richard Murphy, acting public affairs adviser to Assistant Secretary for Near East Affairs, desk officer for Jordan, and duty in the Department's Operations Center. Ms. Jones has also served on the Board of Examiners for the Foreign Service.
Yes the press will do it's best to sugar coat and run cover for the Obots. This time they can't white wash it.
Hello again, tom:
Blockbuster testimony today.. They're going to reveal that we were attacked... OMG! Who knew?Quote:
This time they can't white wash it.
Excon
Now ex you know bad news travels slow in the corridors of power
They are going to reveal systemic failures in State ,Defense ,Intel and the White House ,before ,during ,and after the attack. They will also reveal an intentional cover-up of the facts because they did not want the truth known during the election cycle.
That is a minimum. Hopefully this will encourage whistle-blowers from CIA and the Defense Dept.to come forth and reveal the purpose of their special mission .
Hello again, tom:
Couple things...Quote:
They will also reveal systemic failures in State ,Defense ,Intel and the White House ,before ,during ,and after the attack. They will also reveal an intentional cover-up of the facts because they did not want the truth known during the election cycle.
Nobody is denying that there were mistakes made.
If they were trying to "cover up" their mistakes, they didn't do a very good job of it because within 3 or 4 days, EVERYBODY knew we were attacked by terrorists.. And, Obama STILL kicked Romney's a$$.
You want the CIA to reveal what they're "special mission" was?? Dude! If you want to call the times we LIE about covert CIA activities a coverup, then the government "covers up" EVERY DAY, and it SHOULD!
Excon
Iranian hostages? They were released when Reagan won the election. I don't know what your point on that is, but the issue is the coverup. It may not bother you if your guy is a lying weasel but this is a BIG deal and it ain't going to be pretty. Your side still only sees it as an election problem to sweep under the rug, protect Hillary at all cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I expect you applauded the revelations to the Church Committee.I expect you applauded the revelations of Iran Contra. What I think CIA will reveal is that the operation in Benghazi was not a CIA Op .It was being run in the basement of the White House ala Ollie North.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
I guess you ignored all the links with the facts about Iran. That's okay, we are use to it.
Hello again,
Steve King, that crackerjack right wing congressman, says that if you take Watergate, add Iran Contra to it, and multiply by 10, you've got Benghazi...
Bwa, ha ha ha ha.
excon
Hello again,
Since the git go, you THOUGHT you had Obama by the balls. You THOUGHT Benghazi would be the end of him. Actually, it was more HOPE than thought. But, there's NOTHING there...Quote:
It was being run in the basement of the White House ala Ollie North.
As PROOF, there's a noticeable SHIFT in WHO the bad guy is here, to Hillary Clinton instead of Obama.. I wonder if it has to do with her presidential aspirations.. Nahhh. Republicans wouldn't do that...
Excon
I don't recall comparing Iranian hostages to anything, that was your thing. But I am curious what you're afraid of here, Zero is all about transparency so I'd think you would welcome a little sunshine.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I'm not the one shifting to Evita .Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
You do realize there is still a sap video maker still in jail over this lie ! Talk about someone taking a fall for a false political narrative ! Evita needs to go down too ; but she is just one of the pieces on this chess board.
Hello again, tom:
I don't know what's going on.. Lindsay Graham just said on TV that the blockbuster is the "political spin" Obama put on the attack. He said he was trying to bolster his claim that Al Quaida was decimated...Quote:
Talk about someone taking a fall for a false political narrative ! Evita needs to go down too ; but she is just one of the pieces on this chess board.
Blockbuster??
You also, tom, appear to be talking about POLITICS instead CRIME and COVERUP, and IMPEACHMENT, and SCANDAL.. So, if you want my agreement about the politics, you got it.
Excon
PS> (edited) You have SOME resource for your claim that the CIA was acting like White House plumbers, or something.. Would you SHARE that source?
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:02 AM. |