Pages: 1 2 3

 

2006-11-25 18:09:08
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6960|New York

usmarine2005 wrote:

I was watching Discovery Times this evening, when the year 1978 was up for discussion.  After watching that I realized something I never really understood.  That year, and the Carter admin, marked the beginning of some of the worst problems we face today.  Saddam was coming into power, who he had to support in order to fight against Iran, who we perceived to be the bigger threat.  Russia invaded Afghanistan, which put the wheels in motion to the US supporting the Taliban, because we wanted to defeat communism.  Also, Iran was going thru a major shift in their relationship with the US.  It was a good relationship until that year.

I know there are many, MANY things we can point to in history, but the Carter years seem to stand out as the beginning of a lot of problems that we deal with today.

So, not knowing a lot about that era, how do you think Carter should have handled things knowing what we know now?
Welp Bro, why do you think he goes around Bashing Bush, the war, and everythign else since 2001? Because he caused all this crap, and hes a ceinle old man who has to point fingers to make himself feel better.

He should go have a Billy Beer and STHU as far as im concerned.
2006-11-25 18:14:29
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6663|North Carolina

lowing wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

lowing wrote:

yadda yadda yadda, .........they were held hostage for 444 days!!!..............HE DID NOTHING.....talking for a year and a half is still NOTHING.............Reagan crossed the threashhold of the White House and the hostages were put on a plane home. Iran KNEW Reagan was NOT going to FUCK AROUND with them.
Ah yes...  the October surprise.  It always helps to have friends in the CIA.  The first Bush president deserves credit for that, not Reagan.
Yeah, tell that to Libya after the barracks bombing in Beruit. Reagan had 3 secret service agents assigned to cover his BALLS alone.
It's funny you should mention that.  How Reagan handled Beirut was...  interesting...  to say the least.  Apparently, he was more interested in dealing with Grenada than with Lebanon.
2006-11-25 18:22:14
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

Turquoise wrote:

lowing wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


Ah yes...  the October surprise.  It always helps to have friends in the CIA.  The first Bush president deserves credit for that, not Reagan.
Yeah, tell that to Libya after the barracks bombing in Beirut. Reagan had 3 secret service agents assigned to cover his BALLS alone.
It's funny you should mention that.  How Reagan handled Beirut was...  interesting...  to say the least.  Apparently, he was more interested in dealing with Grenada than with Lebanon.
Seems to me, my beloved Ronald Reagan dealt with BOTH!!!....


I remember, cuz I was in the Air Force when our bombs "accidentally" hit the French embassy in Tripoli.  Might not have happened if our pilots weren't so exhausted flying AROUND French airspace to get to their intended targets. Oh well, as I recall, it was a night of celebration and French jokes.
2006-11-25 18:29:53
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6663|North Carolina

lowing wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

lowing wrote:


Yeah, tell that to Libya after the barracks bombing in Beirut. Reagan had 3 secret service agents assigned to cover his BALLS alone.
It's funny you should mention that.  How Reagan handled Beirut was...  interesting...  to say the least.  Apparently, he was more interested in dealing with Grenada than with Lebanon.
Seems to me, my beloved Ronald Reagan dealt with BOTH!!!....


I remember, cuz I was in the Air Force when our bombs "accidentally" hit the French embassy in Tripoli.  Might not have happened if our pilots weren't so exhausted flying AROUND French airspace to get to their intended targets. Oh well, as I recall, it was a night of celebration and French jokes.
President Ronald Reagan called the attack a "despicable act" and pledged to keep a military force in Lebanon. Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger said there would be no change in the U.S.'s Lebanon policy. On October 24 French President François Mitterrand visited the French bomb site. It was not an official visit, and he only stayed for a few hours, but he did declare: "We will stay." U.S. Vice President George Bush toured the Marine bombing site on October 26 and said the U.S. "would not be cowed by terrorists."

In retaliation for the attacks, France launched an air strike in the Beqaa Valley against Iranian Revolutionary Guard positions. President Reagan assembled his national security team and planned to target the Sheik Abdullah barracks in Baalbek, Lebanon, which housed Iranian Revolutionary Guards believed to be training Hezbollah fighters. But Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger aborted the mission, reportedly because of his concerns that it would harm U.S. relations with other Arab nations.

Besides a few shellings, there was no serious retaliation for the Beirut bombing from the Americans. In December 1983, U.S. aircraft attacked Syrian targets in Lebanon, but this was in response to Syrian missile attacks on planes, not the barracks bombing.

The Marines were moved offshore where they could not be targeted. On February 7, 1984, President Reagan ordered the Marines to begin withdrawal from Lebanon. This was completed on February 26; the rest of the MNF was withdrawn by April.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beiru … ks_bombing

It would appear your beloved France was actually who dealt with Lebanon.  Ironic, eh?
2006-11-25 18:42:09
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA
http://www.afa.org/magazine/March1999/0399canyon.asp

I draw your attention specifically to the 1st and 4th paragraghs. Libya now wants to be friends.

Ironic eh??

Last edited by lowing (2006-11-25 18:44:42)

2006-11-25 18:55:09
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6663|North Carolina
Hey, I'm glad that Libya is moving in the right direction too, but we were talking about Lebanon.  We concluded that Syria (and Hezbollah, more specifically) were behind what happened in Beirut.
2006-11-25 19:13:28
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

Turquoise wrote:

Hey, I'm glad that Libya is moving in the right direction too, but we were talking about Lebanon.  We concluded that Syria (and Hezbollah, more specifically) were behind what happened in Beirut.
Libya was a major sponsor of terrorist activites during the 80's. The attack on Libya was a message to ALL terrorists groups, the Reagan administration will fight back.
2006-11-25 20:41:14
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|7030|PNW

TeamZephyr wrote:

Screw what the US constitution says, screw Free Religion and Free Speech, liberals are bad! They are the worst people in society and the liberals are keeping America down!
*clears throat* Of course, modern US liberals are completely innocent when it comes to attacking various freedoms.
2006-11-25 23:55:30
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6808|Southeastern USA
last night at the drag show a libyan hit on me, i was flattered even though she was butch
2006-11-26 00:32:46
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6933|Canberra, AUS

Stingray24 wrote:

lowing wrote:

I am also sorry that  you are offended, as a liberal, by being called a liberal.
roflmao I've always been fascinated by that, too. I'm a conservative, so I take pride in being called one.  Some liberals really bristle when they're called by their approriate label.
You said why "we" don't like it.

That word. Yep. That one.

LABEL.

It makes "us" feel like "we" are all products on an assembly line - and that "we", as a group, have exactly the same views, no variations.

THAT IS TOTAL BULLSHIT.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2006-11-26 01:05:25
deeznutz1245
Connecticut: our chimps are stealin yo' faces.
+483|6751|Connecticut

acEofspadEs6313 wrote:

rmilhous wrote:

stryyker wrote:

As far as i have learned, Carter wasnt much of a "decisive" president. He was kinda halfway on alot of issues.

But who knows how much better a Peanut farmer from Arkansas is than a bumpkin from Texas
Hey Stryyker,
Carter was from Georgia. Not that I am proud of that or anything. At least we have Lil' Jon and the East Side Boyz though.

LOL.

:NBS:rmilhous
Carter was a smart man. I mean, studying nuclear physics and reactor technology only for a few months is beyond what most people can do anyway.
Maybe, but intelligence does not necessarily warrant power. There a lot of smart people in this forum but I don't beleive any of us are fit to lead a nation. Well, maybe Sri Lanka or something.
Malloy must go
2006-11-26 02:48:33
TeamZephyr
Maintaining My Rage Since 1975
+124|6788|Hillside, Melbourne, Australia

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

TeamZephyr wrote:

Screw what the US constitution says, screw Free Religion and Free Speech, liberals are bad! They are the worst people in society and the liberals are keeping America down!
*clears throat* Of course, modern US liberals are completely innocent when it comes to attacking various freedoms.
Hey don't look at me! I love your 2nd Amendment.
2006-11-26 03:31:26
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

Spark wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

lowing wrote:

I am also sorry that  you are offended, as a liberal, by being called a liberal.
roflmao I've always been fascinated by that, too. I'm a conservative, so I take pride in being called one.  Some liberals really bristle when they're called by their approriate label.
You said why "we" don't like it.

That word. Yep. That one.

LABEL.

It makes "us" feel like "we" are all products on an assembly line - and that "we", as a group, have exactly the same views, no variations.

THAT IS TOTAL BULLSHIT.
It was not my intention to make you feel like "you were all products of an assembly line", for that, I apologize.
My intention was to make you feel dirty, in a desperate need of a shower, to urgently wash off the combined stenches of socialism, pacification, and appeasement.
2006-11-26 04:28:07
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

kr@cker wrote:

last night at the drag show a libyan hit on me, i was flattered even though she was butch
lol, I got it.
2006-11-26 05:20:33
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6960|New York

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

TeamZephyr wrote:

Screw what the US constitution says, screw Free Religion and Free Speech, liberals are bad! They are the worst people in society and the liberals are keeping America down!
*clears throat* Of course, modern US liberals are completely innocent when it comes to attacking various freedoms.
Interesting, yet off topic, BUT. Lets take smoking for example. It will soon(already is in California) Be ileagal to smoke ANYWHERE Outside, In the open air. They are useing the clean air act against every american who smokes, calling smoking Polution. Yah, like people smoking are causeing that smog problem LOL. What a crock of shit. It will be Ileagal to smoke in your own car if you have a child in the car (this is even if you have a convertable). They are on course to outlawing Cigs, Can you Imagine the crime rate and problems there will be if this happens? Ordinary Americans will be turned into Black market dealers, and become drugaddicts in the eyes of the law, because the people making the laws have NO clue what this is going to do to our economy and our crime rate.

Theres never been Domestic violence associated with smoking(that will change) Theres never been Smoking related car accidents(unlike Alcohol) There hasnt been smoking related murders(this will also change). I know this is off subject and im sorry for that, But Why is smoking so targeted and alcohol so accepted? It kills more people a year directly and indirectly, It causes divorces, domestic violence, murders, and Its legal and is never targeted?

Ok as for the OP i already answered it earlier on this page, Sorry for the rant.
2006-11-26 10:48:23
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6663|North Carolina

lowing wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Hey, I'm glad that Libya is moving in the right direction too, but we were talking about Lebanon.  We concluded that Syria (and Hezbollah, more specifically) were behind what happened in Beirut.
Libya was a major sponsor of terrorist activites during the 80's. The attack on Libya was a message to ALL terrorists groups, the Reagan administration will fight back.
True, but I'm just saying, you've switched the subject to further your own views.

Every president screws up, Reagan included.  He's not the idol you make him out to be.  I like Clinton, but I readily admit his flaws and disagree with a number of things he's done.

Nevertheless, I think we can agree that Carter was not one of our better presidents, but where we disagree is that I don't believe Reagan was one of our better ones either.
2006-11-26 10:51:10
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6663|North Carolina

deeznutz1245 wrote:

Maybe, but intelligence does not necessarily warrant power. There a lot of smart people in this forum but I don't beleive any of us are fit to lead a nation. Well, maybe Sri Lanka or something.
On the flipside though, we've seen how a lack of intelligence affects the presidency as well (Bush).

The problem with our system is that Americans place a greater importance on charisma than on competency when voting for candidates.  Until we become more educated as a populace about public policy, we will continue to have rich but mediocre politicians running things.
2006-11-26 12:41:14
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

Turquoise wrote:

lowing wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Hey, I'm glad that Libya is moving in the right direction too, but we were talking about Lebanon.  We concluded that Syria (and Hezbollah, more specifically) were behind what happened in Beirut.
Libya was a major sponsor of terrorist activites during the 80's. The attack on Libya was a message to ALL terrorists groups, the Reagan administration will fight back.
True, but I'm just saying, you've switched the subject to further your own views.

Every president screws up, Reagan included.  He's not the idol you make him out to be.  I like Clinton, but I readily admit his flaws and disagree with a number of things he's done.

Nevertheless, I think we can agree that Carter was not one of our better presidents, but where we disagree is that I don't believe Reagan was one of our better ones either.
agree to disagree, I think Reagan was the greatest president since Roosevelt.

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard