I dunno if we have programs like that, but I certainly do not rule out the possibility. I think we need to come up with a form of oversight for secret programs that is not there. Wether a program is good or bad, well, who knows, but we need more oversight into whether a program is legal or not.
••Oversight by whom? Have you seen what morons most politician are? They're in position because of bombast, not because of brains. So, who will watch the watchman?
Buying hostages sends exactly the wrong message. We want to discourage people from terrorism, not reward them for it. If rescue is not an option, then yes, we should "let them rot". You cannot get rid of all the risks in this world, and choices are sometimes hard, but paying off terrorists is something I think we should not do.
••Of course they should be left to rot unless they are connected to you somehow. Like your father or sister or brother-in-law or you best friends brother-in-laws cousin Marty who feeds the feral cats.
Whether arming the Contras was good or not is irrelevant to the scandal. Separation of power and checks and balances are an integral part of our government system. Even if congress was wrong(and to be clear, I do not think they where), the white house cannot just say "so what" and do whatever they want.
••That was the point of my post. Don't they constantly do stuff like this? Don't they sort of have to?
I actually have looked at the concept. I was one of the people who made the Tower report a bestseller(it wasn't that good, kinda dry actually, but I did make it through it). The fact it was a republican administration is irrelevant to my views. If Clinton had done this, I would have criticized him for it too.
••Yes, thank you for not being partisan.
Two part question, so a two part answer. I dunno if we have programs like that, but I certainly do not rule out the possibility. I think we need to come up with a form of oversight for secret programs that is not there. Wether a program is good or bad, well, who knows, but we need more oversight into whether a program is legal or not.
Buying hostages sends exactly the wrong message. We want to discourage people from terrorism, not reward them for it. If rescue is not an option, then yes, we should "let them rot". You cannot get rid of all the risks in this world, and choices are sometimes hard, but paying off terrorists is something I think we should not do.
Whether arming the Contras was good or not is irrelevant to the scandal. Separation of power and checks and balances are an integral part of our government system. Even if congress was wrong(and to be clear, I do not think they where), the white house cannot just say "so what" and do whatever they want.
I actually have looked at the concept. I was one of the people who made the Tower report a bestseller(it wasn't that good, kinda dry actually, but I did make it through it). The fact it was a republican administration is irrelevant to my views. If Clinton had done this, I would have criticized him for it too.