• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

President Donald J. Trump

Started by The General, February 11, 2011, 01:33:34 AM

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on February 22, 2018, 10:14:44 PM
The NGO is one of the worst ideas ever. It's a loophole around democracy. In the 80s it allowed Reagan to fund the Contras without congressional approval; it's allowed even more big money special interests to influence politics and now this. ::)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organization

Not so.  The Congress passed support for the Contras every single year.  As they should have. 

If you recall, in the early '80s the Soviets were on the move - most notably Afghanistan, Angola... and throughout Latin America.  In our hemisphere they operated through their proxies in Cuba (funding thuggish ''rebel'' groups in various countries in Central America, the Caribbean, the Andean countries, even Mexico).  The same fools who not so long ago were going down to Venezuela supporting that government, were telling us the wonders of La Révolution in Nicaragua, etc.

There was absolutely no reason for the US to sit by and watch our allies be attacked by our enemies - assassinations, the murders of peasants, blowing up infrastructure, destroying villages and crops, kidnapping, extortion, on and on.

And shame on the Congress micromanaging what we could and couldn't do, tweaking the Boland Amendment every year.  One year X was ok, next year it isn't, then back (the president is the commander-in-chief and determines the details, not the Congress).

The Democrat Congress - who at the time often sided with the Russians (!) on a variety of policy items - held support for our allies in the region hostage in exchange for their budget busting programs.  Turns out that group foreshadowed what that party was going to turn into twenty some years later.


Dr. MD MD

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on February 22, 2018, 11:05:24 PM
Not so.  The Congress passed support for the Contras every single year.  As they should have. 

If you recall, in the early '80s the Soviets were on the move - most notably Afghanistan, Angola... and throughout Latin America.  In our hemisphere they operated through their proxies in Cuba (funding thuggish ''rebel'' groups in various countries in Central America, the Caribbean, the Andean countries, even Mexico).  The same fools who not so long ago were going down to Venezuela supporting that government, were telling us the wonders of La Révolution in Nicaragua, etc.

There was absolutely no reason for the US to sit by and watch our allies be attacked by our enemies - assassinations, the murders of peasants, blowing up infrastructure, destroying villages and crops, kidnapping, extortion, on and on.

And shame on the Congress micromanaging what we could and couldn't do, tweaking the Boland Amendment every year.  One year X was ok, next year it isn't, then back (the president is the commander-in-chief and determines the details, not the Congress).

The Democrat Congress - who at the time often sided with the Russians (!) on a variety of policy items - held support for our allies in the region hostage in exchange for their budget busting programs.  Turns out that group foreshadowed what that party was going to turn into twenty some years later.

Then why was there a scandal and a hearing about it when that came out? I think you're wrong about this one. Look, I wasn't trying to start a debate about whether that was right and good or not. The fact is Reagan was able to funnel money to them through his chosen NGOs and through other more nefarious means, obviously.

albrecht

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on February 22, 2018, 11:05:24 PM
Not so.  The Congress passed support for the Contras every single year.  As they should have. 

If you recall, in the early '80s the Soviets were on the move - most notably Afghanistan, Angola... and throughout Latin America.  In our hemisphere they operated through their proxies in Cuba (funding thuggish ''rebel'' groups in various countries in Central America, the Caribbean, the Andean countries, even Mexico).  The same fools who not so long ago were going down to Venezuela supporting that government, were telling us the wonders of La Révolution in Nicaragua, etc.

There was absolutely no reason for the US to sit by and watch our allies be attacked by our enemies - assassinations, the murders of peasants, blowing up infrastructure, destroying villages and crops, kidnapping, extortion, on and on.

And shame on the Congress micromanaging what we could and couldn't do, tweaking the Boland Amendment every year.  One year X was ok, next year it isn't, then back (the president is the commander-in-chief and determines the details, not the Congress).

The Democrat Congress - who at the time often sided with the Russians (!) on a variety of policy items - held support for our allies in the region hostage in exchange for their budget busting programs.  Turns out that group foreshadowed what that party was going to turn into twenty some years later.
Yep. Though I had some reservations about some particulars, this idea that the commies were right, is wrong. Here, or elsewhere. There is no doubt a lot of historical revisionism and such these days. And, infiltration, by the Soviets, who, oddly, are now the worst critics? Wake up people. It was not, initially or now, about picking a person but about destabilization, etc. The only ""real" fight was whether the Gramice and etc schools or the "hard" stuff.

GravitySucks

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on February 22, 2018, 11:10:31 PM
Then why was there a scandal and a hearing about it when that came out? I think you're wrong about this one. Look, I wasn't trying to start a debate about whether that was right and good or not. The fact is Reagan was able to funnel money to them through his chosen NGOs and through other more nefarious means, obviously.

It was the sale of arms to Iran to fund the Contras that was the no-no. This was after the Shah fell and the whole Iran Hostage situation.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: GravitySucks on February 22, 2018, 11:43:47 PM
It was the sale of arms to Iran to fund the Contras that was the no-no. This was after the Shah fell and the whole Iran Hostage situation.

I know. I was young but I do remember it. I think the house was controlled by the Dems and they weren't for secret wars in the jungle because it would turn into the next Vietnam. Remember that? I also distinctly remember watching the Giper on TV announcing how he was going to allocate funding for some NGO (can't remember the name but something with America in it) which would provide aid and support to the Contras. I don't remember the Dems getting down with that but maybe they did eventually and I just didn't notice.

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on February 22, 2018, 11:10:31 PM
Then why was there a scandal and a hearing about it when that came out? I think you're wrong about this one. Look, I wasn't trying to start a debate about whether that was right and good or not. The fact is Reagan was able to funnel money to them through his chosen NGOs and through other more nefarious means, obviously.

As I mentioned 1) the Congress passed the Boland Amendment every year which supported the Contras, and 2) the Congress passed the Boland Amendment every year, but tweaked the language each year, meaning some years X was approved, other years it wasn't.

The makeup of the Congress changes every two years due to elections, and from time to time due to death, resignation, and so on.  It was very difficult getting support for the Contras through the House, and those bills hinged on a vote or two - which is why the language had to be tweaked - in order to get the 218 votes it needed.

Iran-Contra was a separate issue.  Congress approved certain activity and supplies and did not approve other.  Oliver North bypassed Boland restrictions to get certain support to the Contras, rather than leaving them hanging the way we did our allies in South Vietnam.  And good for him.  Iran-Contra was another witch hunt, and when the hearings were televised, the American people were solidly behind North and his actions.  The Democrats slunk off and dropped it, and that was about the end of it.  Only to revive it later as an epithet, when memories had dimmed.

Recall the early and mid 80s.  Iran and Iraq were the two bullies in the region - keeping each other in check - and had a gruesome devastating war with each other.  Saddam was gassing the Kurds and the Iranians, Iran was forcing kids across mine fields in advance of their troops, etc.  It was US policy that neither defeat the other decisively, as having one or the other dominate the region unopposed was unacceptable .  Under the radar we provided low level assistance to each side when the tide would turn against them.

It was against that backdrop that Iran was provided obsolete weapons by Israel, at our request, who then forwarded the funds from the weapons sales to the Contras.  So what - it's not like Reagan illegally removed economic sanctions, provided planeloads of cash on pallets, and green-lighted the Iranian ICBM and nuclear weapons program

Quote from: GravitySucks on February 22, 2018, 11:43:47 PM
It was the sale of arms to Iran to fund the Contras that was the no-no. This was after the Shah fell and the whole Iran Hostage situation.

The Iran-Contra hostage crisis was 1986-87, the hostages taken after the fall of the Shah was 1979-80.

GravitySucks

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on February 23, 2018, 12:02:32 AM
The Iran-Contra hostage crisis was 1986-87, the hostages taken after the fall of the Shah was 1979-80.

Actually the hostage thing was when Carter was President. It was over in 1981 right as Reagan got inaugurated.

Anyways I think we are saying the same thing. The Iran Contra thing wasn’t illegal because of a hostage situation. It was Arms sales to Iran which was on the restricted list to raise money for the Contras.

I forgot about the hostages that Nicauragua had.

Quote from: GravitySucks on February 23, 2018, 12:04:42 AM
Actually the hostage thing was when Carter was President. It was over in 1981 right as Reagan got inaugurated.

Anyways I think we are saying the same thing. The Iran Contra thing wasn’t illegal because of a hostage situation. It was Arms sales to Iran which was on the restricted list to raise money for the Contras.

I forgot about the hostages that Nicauragua had.


Yes, there were hostages but not those mentioned yet.

The scandal began as an operation to free seven American hostages being held in Lebanon by Hezbollah, a paramilitary group with Iranian ties connected to the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair

GravitySucks

Quote from: 21st Century Man on February 23, 2018, 12:11:53 AM

Yes, there were hostages but not those mentioned yet.

The scandal began as an operation to free seven American hostages being held in Lebanon by Hezbollah, a paramilitary group with Iranian ties connected to the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair

I forgot about those too. I should have just kept posting on Reddit

GNS

Quote from: GravitySucks on February 23, 2018, 12:19:34 AM
I forgot about those too. I should have just kept posting on Reddit

GNS

But we love you here. ;)


GravitySucks

Quote from: 21st Century Man on February 23, 2018, 12:20:53 AM
But we love you here. ;)

The shah stuff happened while I was still in the air force. I am real familiar with everything that happened through 1982. I was too worried about space stuff and happy hours for the rest of the 80’s. Except the Bears winning the SuperBowl. I remember that.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: GravitySucks on February 23, 2018, 12:27:25 AM
The shah stuff happened while I was still in the air force. I am real familiar with everything that happened through 1982. I was too worried about space stuff and happy hours for the rest of the 80’s. Except the Bears winning the SuperBowl. I remember that.

Da Bearsss...Da Bearsss...Da...Bullsss.... ;D



Quote from: GravitySucks on February 23, 2018, 12:27:25 AM
The shah stuff happened while I was still in the air force. I am real familiar with everything that happened through 1982. I was too worried about space stuff and happy hours for the rest of the 80’s. Except the Bears winning the SuperBowl. I remember that.


LOL.  Yeah, I know what you mean.  I followed most of it until I graduated from high school in '84 but the next year or two was kind of hazy.  :P I kinda picked up back up on it in '87 til '90.  I think it was '87 when I first discovered Rush.  The 90's were a very busy time for me and I kind of ignored politics until the Lewinsky scandal.

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on February 23, 2018, 12:27:10 AM
Found it! :D

https://www.ned.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democracy

Just curious, what is it you think they did regarding the Contras, or Iran during the Reagan years?

The assistance given to the Contras and the friendly governments fighting Soviet/Cuban backed rebels wasn't a whole lot of money.  These are tiny third world countries that mostly grow coffee and other crops.

I've got some photos taken of abandoned coffee farms burnt and being burned taken from nearby hills, maybe I'll dig them up, scan and post them.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on February 23, 2018, 12:53:52 AM
Just curious, what is it you think they did regarding the Contras, or Iran during the Reagan years?

The assistance given to the Contras and our allies fighting Soviet/Cuban backed rebels wasn't a whole lot of money.  These are tiny third world countries that mostly grow coffee and other crops.

Dude, I'm on your side....and in retrospect I was obviously wrong about him in general. Like I said, I was young and still very much influenced by my parents politics. I'm just remembering seeing Reagan on TV giving a press conference when he first instituted this org in 83 and he himself mentioned how it would be used to aid the Contras. ;)

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on February 23, 2018, 01:01:18 AM
Dude, I'm on your side....and in retrospect I was obviously wrong about him in general. Like I said, I was young and still very much influenced by my parents politics. I'm just remembering seeing Reagan on TV giving a press conference when he first instituted this org in 83 and he himself mentioned how it would be used to aid the Contras. ;)

That is a shame.  I don't know why I'm different but I was pretty conservative (classically liberal as I like too call myself) even as a kid.  My parents were pretty apolitical though there was a bit of an influence from my godfather as I've mentioned before.  I did think my Mom grew up in a restrictive family environment with her parents being extremely conservative in most ways.  She rebelled from that though she was never what I'd call liberal.  My dad's parents especially my grandmother were pretty liberal being part of the flapper generation of the 20's.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 21st Century Man on February 23, 2018, 01:08:23 AM
That is a shame.  I don't know why I'm different but I was pretty conservative (fiscally) even as a kid.  My parents were pretty apolitical though there was a bit of an influence from my godfather as I've mentioned before.  I did think my Mom grew up in a restrictive family environment with her parents being extremely conservative in most ways.  She rebelled from that though she was never what I'd call liberal.  My dad's parents especially my grandmother were pretty liberal being part of the flapper generation of the 20's.

Don't get the wrong idea. I don't mean they were telling me what to think but of course kids pick up on what their parents are interested in. Liberals were different back then anyway. My parents worked hard and were responsible people. I grew up in one house and was well fed and loved by them. They never would've gone for this shit that's happening now. I'm not sure they'd vote conservative as a result but they're weren't totally insane. ;)

Anyway, this is how the progression is supposed to go. You're supposed to be a liberal when you're young and have more heart than head and then become a conservative later in life, like me when you're more balanced. Kids who were conservative are just creepy Alex P Keaton nerds. :P

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on February 23, 2018, 01:16:37 AM
Don't get the wrong idea. I don't mean they were telling me what to think but of course kids pick up on what their parents are interested in. Liberals were different back then anyway. My parents worked hard and were responsible people. I grew up in one house and was well fed and loved by them. They never would've gone for this shit that's happening now. I'm not sure they'd vote conservative as a result but they're weren't totally insane. ;)

Anyway, this is how the progression is supposed to go. You're supposed to be a liberal when you're young and have more heart than head and then become a conservative later in life, like me when you're more balanced. Kids who were conservative are just creepy Alex P Keaton nerds. :P


That was me but not really a nerd. I liked the typical bands. I didn't talk politics back then with my friends.  I was a bit of a preppie.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 21st Century Man on February 23, 2018, 01:31:32 AM

That was me but not really a nerd. I liked the typical bands. I didn't talk politics back then with my friends.  I was a bit of a preppie.

It's weird. My dad always voted Dem I think mostly because he belonged to a union but how he operated in life seems pretty hard-nosed TCB conservative when I think about it. I bet a lot of people are like that in their personal lives but not in their politics.

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on February 23, 2018, 01:36:37 AM
It's weird. My dad always voted Dem I think mostly because he belonged to a union but how he operated in life seems pretty hard-nosed TCB conservative when I think about it. I bet a lot of people are like that in their personal lives but not in their politics.

A lot of Democrats were conservatives back then.  My Mom's parents were Roosevelt Democrats though very conservative like I said. My dad's parents were union workers too and mostly Democrat probably but didn't really talk politics.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 21st Century Man on February 23, 2018, 01:44:09 AM
A lot of Democrats were conservatives back then.  My Mom's parents were Roosevelt Democrats though very conservative like I said. My dad's parents were union workers too and mostly Democrat probably but didn't really talk politics.

My parents were born toward the end of the great depression and so they started life dirt poor. I think that just inherently makes you somewhat conservative.

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on February 23, 2018, 01:47:13 AM
My parents were born toward the end of the great depression and so they started life dirt poor. I think that just inherently makes you somewhat conservative.

Mom's parents had a small farm and my granddaddy made his living by painting around Jackson, TN.  Never had much money and the exposure to lead paint took a heavy toll on him after 20 years.

My paternal grandfather worked in steel construction and grandmother was a telephone operator.  They also had a farm in Rives, TN but struggled during the depression to make end's meet so they ended up moving back to Chicago and then LA.  They did well in the long run.

PaulAtreides

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on February 22, 2018, 06:20:31 PM


I believe in taking care of myself, and a balanced diet and a rigorous
exercise routine. In the morning, if my face is a little puffy, I'll put on an
ice pack while doing my stomach crunches. I can do a thousand now.
After I remove the ice pack, I use a deep pore cleanser lotion.
In the shower, I use a water activated gel cleanser. Then a
honey almond body scrub. And on the face, an exfoliating gel scrub.
Then apply an herb mint facial mask, which I leave on for 10 minutes
while I prepare the rest of my routine. I always use an aftershave lotion
with little or no alcohol, because alcohol dries your face out and makes
you look older. Then moisturizer, then an anti-aging eye balm followed by
a final moisturizing protective lotion.

As opposed to MD MD's routine of covering his face with a mask of pig shit and splashing his pits and parts with water from the toilet bowl.

Kidnostad3

Quote from: PaulAtreides on February 23, 2018, 08:47:26 AM
As opposed to MD MD's routine of covering his face with a mask of pig shit and splashing his pits and parts with water from the toilet bowl.

More brilliant rhetoric from the Clarence Darrow of St Louis.  Who even thinks like that?

Gd5150

Another round of indictments. Still:

No collusion.
No evidence of collusion.
No Trump/Russia collusion.

Indictments have nothing to do with Trump, Trump campaign, or Russia.

The witchhunt is doing a great job at ignoring the confirmed Russia collusion, the confirmed election rigging, and the confirmed money laundering. Why? Because it was all done by Hilllary and the DemoKKKRats.

QuoteThe Forth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Hard to have probable cause when you have no clue what you’re looking for.

Jackstar

Quote from: Gd5150 on February 23, 2018, 11:47:03 AM
No Trump/Russia collusion.

What would it even fucking matter if he did collude with Russia?

.

ONLY LINCOLN MAY DO THIS

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod