The Greatest American results.

[faminedynasty]

"Dr. C. Everett Koop, Reagan's surgeon general, has said that because of "intradepartmental politics" he was cut out of all AIDS discussions for the first five years of the Reagan administration. The reason, he explained, was "because transmission of AIDS was understood to be primarily in the homosexual population and in those who abused intravenous drugs." The president's advisers, Koop said, "took the stand, 'They are only getting what they justly deserve.' "

Reagan's AIDS Legacy / Silence equals death

 

[Hatuey]

The Soviet Union was in an arms race with the U.S. and grossly overspent to try to keep it up with Reagan's huge increase in military spending, aimed at this very result. It spent billions on the war in Afghanistan that it couldn't finish because Reagan kept the other side armed and capable.

And as I said they didn't collapse because of this. They collapsed because they'd been grossly mismanaging the economy since the 60s.

The Iranians didn't release the hostages until Reagan took office. Listen to Carter, interviewed by Wolf Blitzer:

ROFL You silly revisionist.

Iran hostage crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The death of the Shah on July 27 and the invasion of Iran by Iraq in September 1980 made Iran more receptive to the idea of resolving the hostage crisis. Despite losing the November 1980 presidential election to Ronald Reagan, President Jimmy Carter, in the final days of his office, negotiated the release of the hostages through Secretary of State Warren Christopher, Algerian intermediaries and members of the Iranian government.

In the closing days of Carter's Presidency, Algerian diplomat Abdulkarim Ghuraib opened fruitful, albeit biased, negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. This resulted in the "Algiers Accords" of January 19, 1981, which entailed Iran's commitment to free the hostages immediately.

One more helicopter?? Give me a break. He had 444 days to bring the hostages home and FAILED. At the very least, the Iranians waited until Reagan was in office to spite Carter. It wasn't a coincidence.

Wow M.C. Spinner :

Iran hostage crisis: Information and Much More from Answers.com

Despite continued pressure on Iran, the hostages remained in captivity five months after the crisis began, and pressure mounted on the Carter administration to find a more effective solution. After much deliberation, Carter authorized an ill-fated military mission to rescue the hostages. The 24 April 1979 rescue mission suffered from military miscalculations and untimely mechanical failures, forcing the mission to be aborted. The final mishap came during a refueling stop, when two of the helicopters collided, killing eight servicemen. When President Carter informed the nation of the mission and its failure, he suffered politically.

 

[MC.no.spin]

And as I said they didn't collapse because of this. They collapsed because they'd been grossly mismanaging the economy since the 60s.

They collapsed because this strategy by Reagan put the final nail in the coffin.

However, it's nice to see a liberal like yourself admit that communism is gross mismanagement of an economy.

ROFL You silly revisionist.

Iran hostage crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





Wow M.C. Spinner :

Iran hostage crisis: Information and Much More from Answers.com

444 days is not a revision. Carter failing to get the hostages home while in office is not a revision. The hostages finally being freed as soon as Reagain took office is not a revision. It's not even worth debating. You can disagree why it happened but those time frames are accurate.

 

[Hatuey]

They collapsed because this strategy by Reagan put the final nail in the coffin.

However, it's nice to see a liberal like yourself admit that communism is gross mismanagement of an economy.

The Russians had already outstocked the U.S. in nuclear weapons by the 70s. It was their cronyism and mismanagement that did them in from the 60s. Not Reagan.

444 days is not a revision. Carter failing to get the hostages home while in office is not a revision. The hostages finally being freed as soon as Reagain took office is not a revision. It's not even worth debating. You can disagree why it happened but those time frames are accurate.

You complete idiot. Carter had already negotiated their release. Your false claim that they were released because of Reagan is a clear sign of you revisionist tactics. It was all Carter. Not Reagan. You've been exposed. Man up.

 

[Billo_Really]

This may sound wierd or hokey, but I don't care.

When I here the word American, the first image that pops into my head is John Wayne.

 

[MC.no.spin]

The Russians had already outstocked the U.S. in nuclear weapons by the 70s. It was their cronyism and mismanagement that did them in from the 60s. Not Reagan.



You complete idiot. Carter had already negotiated their release. Your false claim that they were released because of Reagan is a clear sign of you revisionist tactics. It was all Carter. Not Reagan. You've been exposed. Man up.

Personal attacks are an unhealthy trait on the message boards up here. Admittedly, I have failed to practice restraint at times, but I don't think I have gone so far as to call another specific poster I'm debating an idiot. This is definitely crossing the line, and I'm not going to join you.

You can crown Carter for the hostage release if you like, but the fact remains it was one of the issues that cost him the campaign, took 444 days, and didn't occur until Reagan took office. There is no explanation from you as to why they waited until Reagan took office.

 

[the makeout hobo]

Personal attacks are an unhealthy trait on the message boards up here. Admittedly, I have failed to practice restraint at times, but I don't think I have gone so far as to call another specific poster I'm debating an idiot. This is definitely crossing the line, and I'm not going to join you.

You can crown Carter for the hostage release if you like, but the fact remains it was one of the issues that cost him the campaign, took 444 days, and didn't occur until Reagan took office. There is no explanation from you as to why they waited until Reagan took office.

spinny, why do YOU think the Iranians released the hostages when they did, and why did they do it? Let's hear your thoughts on the issue.

 

[reaganburch]

spinny, why do YOU think the Iranians released the hostages when they did, and why did they do it? Let's hear your thoughts on the issue.

My opinion, if you don't mind me breaking in here, and let me preface this by saying it's just an opinion...

But, I believe Iran was scared shitless in having to deal with Ronald Reagan. In that entire 1980 election cycle, people were calling Reagan a loose cannon, war hawk, who would lead the entire world into war the first chance he got...

"In the closing days of Carter's Presidency, Algerian diplomat Abdulkarim Ghuraib opened fruitful, albeit biased, negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. This resulted in the "Algiers Accords" of January 19, 1981, which entailed Iran's commitment to free the hostages immediately."

This was part of one of Hatueys' post, so I re-reference it. Ronald Reagan was elected President on November 4, 1980, so the Iranians knew he was coming 2 months before the Algiers Accords...

 

[Hatuey]

Personal attacks are an unhealthy trait on the message boards up here. Admittedly, I have failed to practice restraint at times, but I don't think I have gone so far as to call another specific poster I'm debating an idiot. This is definitely crossing the line, and I'm not going to join you.

You can crown Carter for the hostage release if you like, but the fact remains it was one of the issues that cost him the campaign, took 444 days, and didn't occur until Reagan took office. There is no explanation from you as to why they waited until Reagan took office.

:rofl - What an idiot. The Iranians didn't release the hostages because Reagan took office(like you erroneously claimed). They released the hostages because Carter agreed to the unfreezing 8 billion in Iranian assets. You've been debunked. Welcome to DP. M.C. Full Of Spin.

 

[Hatuey]

My opinion, if you don't mind me breaking in here, and let me preface this by saying it's just an opinion...

But, I believe Iran was scared shitless in having to deal with Ronald Reagan. In that entire 1980 election cycle, people were calling Reagan a loose cannon, war hawk, who would lead the entire world into war the first chance he got...

"In the closing days of Carter's Presidency, Algerian diplomat Abdulkarim Ghuraib opened fruitful, albeit biased, negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. This resulted in the "Algiers Accords" of January 19, 1981, which entailed Iran's commitment to free the hostages immediately."

This was part of one of Hatueys' post, so I re-reference it. Ronald Reagan was elected President on November 4, 1980, so the Iranians knew he was coming 2 months before the Algiers Accords...

LoL - This still has little to do with reality or the claims made by M.C. Spinner. - The belief that the Iranians released the hostages because they feared Reagan is ridiculous.

 

[MC.no.spin]

LoL - This still has little to do with reality or the claims made by M.C. Spinner. - The belief that the Iranians released the hostages because they feared Reagan is ridiculous.

That's not what special ops personnel who were there have to say. It's been written about in two books:

Crippled Eagle: A Historical Perspective

Guests of the Ayatollah: The First Battle in America's War with Militant Islam

Excerpts paraphrased below by this website (linked below):

However, special ops personnel involved in the preparations for the second rescue attempt believed that incoming President Ronald Reagan was involved in the planning and timing of the second rescue attempt, and that these intentions were either implied or made known to the de facto Iranian government, leading to the hostages' release just minutes after Reagan's inauguration. This was reinforced by the fact that the personnel involved were on alert status, ready to go at a moment's notice, in the days leading up to the inauguration, and that the required equipment was already packed up and waiting to be shipped. Thus, a perceived and possibly communicated threat of invasion could also have influenced the timing of the hostage release.[38].[39]

Iran hostage crisis

 

[reaganburch]

LoL - This still has little to do with reality or the claims made by M.C. Spinner. - The belief that the Iranians released the hostages because they feared Reagan is ridiculous.

Ridiculous? Hmmm... Let's see...

Ronald Reagan, 1911-2004 - The Legacy of Ronald Reagan - MSNBC.com

And here's a snippet...

"The Iranians who had seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran later said they released the hostages only because they feared that Reagan might deal with them “like a cowboy.”"

I got this off of MSNBC, not Fox News... and we all know how much MSNBC LOVES Republicans...

EDIT: Here's another article from The New Yorker back in 2001...

Bernard Lewis on the history of Islam's grievances against the West

And a snippet...

"Muslim terrorists had been driven by such beliefs before. One of the most surprising revelations in the memoirs of those who held the American Embassy in Teheran from 1979 to 1981 was that their original intention had been to hold the building and the hostages for only a few days. They changed their minds when statements from Washington made it clear that there was no danger of serious action against them. They finally released the hostages, they explained, only because they feared that the new President, Ronald Reagan, might approach the problem "like a cowboy.""

 

[MC.no.spin]

Ridiculous? Hmmm... Let's see...

Ronald Reagan, 1911-2004 - The Legacy of Ronald Reagan - MSNBC.com

And here's a snippet...

"The Iranians who had seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran later said they released the hostages only because they feared that Reagan might deal with them “like a cowboy.”"

I got this off of MSNBC, not Fox News... and we all know how much MSNBC LOVES Republicans...

Damn right! And not like that ***** Carter!

One of the Greatest Americans in History: Ronald Reagan

 

[Kandahar]

Do you believe Ronald Reagan is the greatest American ever? Can he possibly be greater then Washington, Franklin and Lincoln? What did Reagan do that was greater then drafting the constitution(James Madison) What about being the principal author of the Declaration of Independence(Thomas Jefferson?)? What did Reagan do that was important then laying the foundation for this country? Am I the only one disturbed by the outcome of this "contest"?

Reagan doesn't even make the top ten list. The greatest Americans to ever live, IMO:

1. Norman Borlaug
2. Albert Einstein
3. Henry Ford
4. George Washington
5. Philo Farnsworth
6. Martin Luther King
7. Alexander Hamilton
8. George Marshall
9. Thomas Edison
10. Andrew Carnegie

 

[reaganburch]

Reagan doesn't even make the top ten list. The greatest Americans to ever live, IMO:

1. Norman Borlaug
2. Albert Einstein
3. Henry Ford
4. George Washington
5. Philo Farnsworth
6. Martin Luther King
7. Alexander Hamilton
8. George Marshall
9. Thomas Edison
10. Andrew Carnegie

No Lincoln? No Ben Franklin? Nikola Tesla?

I'll be honest, I've never heard of Norman Borlaug nor Philo Farnsworth before, I'm gonna have to go do some research...

 

[MC.no.spin]

Reagan doesn't even make the top ten list. The greatest Americans to ever live, IMO:

1. Norman Borlaug
2. Albert Einstein
3. Henry Ford
4. George Washington
5. Philo Farnsworth
6. Martin Luther King
7. Alexander Hamilton
8. George Marshall
9. Thomas Edison
10. Andrew Carnegie

This is an interesting list. Questions could be raised about several, but I specifically would like to know why you picked Carnegie. I had a socialist loving history professor who ran him down as one of the worst Americans ever (and gave him only consillatory remarks about his eventual big donations at the end of his life) for his terrible working conditions and pay for his laborers; her class emphasized the muckraking that went on in that era exposing his oppressive work standards, and that he was one of the reasons for the initial progressive movement to make unions legal, rid the country of trusts and monopolies, etc.

Interesting name on the list for me. I've had to shred most of what that professor tried to teach me, so I'm curious what your take is on the guy.

 

[RedAkston]

No Lincoln? No Ben Franklin? Nikola Tesla?

I'll be honest, I've never heard of Norman Borlaug nor Philo Farnsworth before, I'm gonna have to go do some research...

I second your first three questions. I'd never heard of the other two either, but I wouldn't list either of them in any top 10 list after doing some research, although Borlaug did a lot of humanitarian work.

 

[Kandahar]

No Lincoln? No Ben Franklin? Nikola Tesla?

Well, they'd all be on my top 20. I considered putting Tesla on my top 10, but decided the others on my list deserved it more. He'd probably get the #11 slot on my list.

Politicians are largely overrated IMO. Lincoln and Franklin were more important than most politicians...but scientists and businessmen are more important overall.

I'll be honest, I've never heard of Norman Borlaug nor Philo Farnsworth before, I'm gonna have to go do some research...

Norman Borlaug is an agricultural scientist who introduced high-yield crops to India and Africa, and has saved more lives than any other human being in history. He is more responsible than anyone else for lifting continental Asia out of poverty.

Philo Farnsworth was the inventor of the television. Given the enormous impact his invention has had on the world, I definitely think he's one of the greatest Americans.

 

[Hatuey]

Ridiculous? Hmmm... Let's see...

Ronald Reagan, 1911-2004 - The Legacy of Ronald Reagan - MSNBC.com

And here's a snippet...

"The Iranians who had seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran later said they released the hostages only because they feared that Reagan might deal with them “like a cowboy.”"

I got this off of MSNBC, not Fox News... and we all know how much MSNBC LOVES Republicans...

EDIT: Here's another article from The New Yorker back in 2001...

Bernard Lewis on the history of Islam's grievances against the West

And a snippet...

"Muslim terrorists had been driven by such beliefs before. One of the most surprising revelations in the memoirs of those who held the American Embassy in Teheran from 1979 to 1981 was that their original intention had been to hold the building and the hostages for only a few days. They changed their minds when statements from Washington made it clear that there was no danger of serious action against them. They finally released the hostages, they explained, only because they feared that the new President, Ronald Reagan, might approach the problem "like a cowboy.""

And once more. The reason why the hostages were released :

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0825448.html

President Carter applied economic pressure by halting oil imports from Iran and freezing Iranian assets in the United States. At the same time, he began several diplomatic initiatives to free the hostages, all of which proved fruitless. On Apr. 24, 1980, the United States attempted a rescue mission that failed. After three of eight helicopters were damaged in a sandstorm, the operation was aborted; eight persons were killed during the evacuation. Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, who had opposed the action, resigned after the mission’s failure. 2
In 1980, the death of the shah in Egypt and the invasion of Iran by Iraq (see Iran-Iraq War) made the Iranians more receptive to resolving the hostage crisis. In the United States, failure to resolve the crisis contributed to Ronald Reagan’s defeat of Carter in the presidential election. After the election, with the assistance of Algerian intermediaries, successful negotiations began. On Jan. 20, 1981, the day of President Reagan’s inauguration, the United States released almost $8 billion in Iranian assets and the hostages were freed after 444 days in Iranian detention; the agreement gave Iran immunity from lawsuits arising from the incident.

Could it have been that they did it in exchange for their money and not because of this silly belief Republicans had that the Iranians were scared of Reagan?

 

[reaganburch]

Could it have been that they did it in exchange for their money and not because of this silly belief Republicans had that the Iranians were scared of Reagan?

Could it have been? Sure, perhaps...

But, according to a memoir from a one of the hostage takers(which I didn't even know existed until today), noted in the New Yorker article..... no.....

Silly? Ridiculous? I think not... not unless you want to discount one of the hostage takers...

You have your opinion, I have mine... I have cited two mainstream sources that back up, to the word, my opinion... MSNBC & New Yorker... That the idea of dealing with Reagan made the Iranians begin to negotiate in good faith, for the first time, with the United States... hence, the Algerian Accord...

 

[Hatuey]

Could it have been? Sure, perhaps...

The possibilities are in my favor.

But, according to a memoir from a one of the hostage takers(which I didn't even know existed until today), noted in the New Yorker article..... no.....

And according to the facts. yes.

Silly? Ridiculous? I think not... not unless you want to discount one of the hostage takers...

You have your opinion, I have mine... I have cited two mainstream sources that back up, to the word, my opinion... MSNBC & New Yorker... That the idea of dealing with Reagan made the Iranians begin to negotiate in good faith, for the first time, with the United States... hence, the Algerian Accord...

And I have cited the sequence of events that lead to the final conclusion being that the Iranians let the prisoners go in exchange for their frozen assets and immunity from litigation. Not because they were scared of Reagan. Not to mention the lack of support that Iran was losing globally.

 

[Billo_Really]

 

[Billo_Really]

 

[reaganburch]

The possibilities are in my favor.



And according to the facts. yes.



And I have cited the sequence of events that lead to the final conclusion being that the Iranians let the prisoners go in exchange for their frozen assets and immunity from litigation. Not because they were scared of Reagan. Not to mention the lack of support that Iran was losing globally.

All right Stinger, no sorry, TOT, no sorry, Hatuey... if you discount the sources and links which I've provided, which seem to be the lifeblood of debate around here, then I could also parade all of the hostage crisis principals in Iran that could tell you that it was the election of Reagan that got Iran to the table in the Algierian Accords(they just didn't release them because Reagan was going to President, but it sure helped with the motivation in getting to the table), then apparently, you still would be disagreeable on this topic... so what's the point...

You have links, I have links... I have links from mainstream sources and a memoir from a hostage taker... you believe what you believe if it makes you feel better...

 

[MC.no.spin]

All right Stinger, no sorry, TOT, no sorry, Hatuey... if you discount the sources and links which I've provided, which seem to be the lifeblood of debate around here, then I could also parade all of the hostage crisis principals in Iran that could tell you that it was the election of Reagan that got Iran to the table in the Algierian Accords(they just didn't release them because Reagan was going to President, but it sure helped with the motivation in getting to the table), then apparently, you still would be disagreeable on this topic... so what's the point...

You have links, I have links... I have links from mainstream sources and a memoir from a hostage taker... you believe what you believe if it makes you feel better...

Let me express what Hatuey is feeling right now, it's easier for him if I do it for him. This image sums it up: