Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumNo, Obama is NOT giving weapons to Iran. You're thinking of this guy...
liberal N proud
(60,336 posts)libodem
(19,288 posts)HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Reagan made the arms-for-hostages deal before he was even elected. And the Iranians held up their end of the deal, paying the money for the Contras and releasing the hostages, just as they promised. This proves Obama is foolish for dealing with them, because it's not an underhanded, secret agreement that attempt to shred the US Constitution. Nope. It's right out there in the open, for everybody to examine. We know the Iranians will only keep secret, dishonest agreements. Because they're obligated to be honest when they're acting crooked, and vice versa. See? When they make a dishonest deal, they'll stick with it. When they make an honest deal, they'll break it. Besides, that was Reagan, and this is Obama. Reagan was our greatest president, and Obama is a Muslim community organizer. "I think I've run circles 'round you, logic-wise."
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Iran took the American embassy** and demanded extradition of the Shah. Carter froze their overseas assets. Shah died. Iran demanded we unfreeze their assets. Reagan secretly told them he would, but only if they kept the hostages until he was in office. Once in office, he unfroze their assets, and they released the hostages. There were no arms involved in this transaction.
Flash forward a few years. Iran is at war with Iraq who is being armed by the Soviets. Iran's military is the one they stole from the Shah who was armed by the United States. Iran's military starts running short of arms. Some Americans get taken hostage by, I think, Hezzbolah. Iran offered to obtain the release of those hostages if the United States would sell them arms. Reagan arranged a sell of arms to Iran off the books, then transferred the proceeds, still off the books, to the Contras.
[font size=1]** One of the most heinous acts a government can do. Even full blown wars often end up with a diplomatic solution. But if you can't be trusted with our diplomats, which is what the taking of an embassy tells us, you eliminate even the possibility of diplomacy.[/font]