Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic Wire)   Maybe we should hold off on naming every other airport and library after Reagan until all the facts are in   (theatlanticwire.com) divider line 192
    More: Scary, Ronald Reagan, Saddam Hussein, air war, chemical warfares, intelligence assessment, library, airports, involvement  
•       •       •

7062 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Aug 2013 at 10:25 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



192 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-26 03:28:51 AM  
So that's another thing to add to my "Reagan is a traitor" list. :(
 
2013-08-26 04:01:07 AM  
The obvious tag was unable to inject itself with atropine and unfortunately died.
 
2013-08-26 05:03:08 AM  
It's common knowledge the right wing of this nation has created every enemy that we have today since ww2.


/what is really disappointing is that I posted this comment in the wrong thread...the thread above this one.

/Oh well, can't say it enough anyway.
 
2013-08-26 05:50:57 AM  

Tigger: The Reagan tag was unable to inject itself with Reagan and unfortunately Reaganed.


FTFY
 
2013-08-26 07:57:39 AM  

JerkyMeat: It's common knowledge the right wing of this nation has created every enemy that we have today since ww2.


/what is really disappointing is that I posted this comment in the wrong thread...the thread above this one.

/Oh well, can't say it enough anyway.


It worked well in the other one also.
 
2013-08-26 08:00:29 AM  
I don't see how he was doing anything evil

Nice try, however
 
2013-08-26 08:31:02 AM  

cman: I don't see how he was doing anything evil

Nice try, however


So, supporting the chemical warfare against Iran was A-OK?

Even in spite of all our treaties, international law and claims that our system is morally superior?
 
2013-08-26 08:32:22 AM  

dr_blasto: cman: I don't see how he was doing anything evil

Nice try, however

So, supporting the chemical warfare against Iran was A-OK?

Even in spite of all our treaties, international law and claims that our system is morally superior?


"An Iranian victory is unacceptable" is not equal to "Gas the damn Iranians"
 
2013-08-26 08:37:32 AM  
Why do you think there was such a rush to name stuff after him? It's a subliminal thing. If people keep hearing his name associated with good things, they'll be less likely to believe the bad when it comes to light.
 
2013-08-26 08:45:00 AM  
Right, because Americans will be outraged to hear that their hero helped kill Middle Easterners
 
2013-08-26 08:49:08 AM  

cman: dr_blasto: cman: I don't see how he was doing anything evil

Nice try, however

So, supporting the chemical warfare against Iran was A-OK?

Even in spite of all our treaties, international law and claims that our system is morally superior?

"An Iranian victory is unacceptable" is not equal to "Gas the damn Iranians"


Yet, we took the road supporting the gas attacks on Iran - so, seemingly, gassing is OK so long as it is someone we don't like getting gassed.

SilentStrider: Why do you think there was such a rush to name stuff after him? It's a subliminal thing. If people keep hearing his name associated with good things, they'll be less likely to believe the bad when it comes to light.


Naming airports after Reagan is utterly trolltastic.
 
2013-08-26 08:54:15 AM  

dr_blasto: cman: dr_blasto: cman: I don't see how he was doing anything evil

Nice try, however

So, supporting the chemical warfare against Iran was A-OK?

Even in spite of all our treaties, international law and claims that our system is morally superior?

"An Iranian victory is unacceptable" is not equal to "Gas the damn Iranians"

Yet, we took the road supporting the gas attacks on Iran - so, seemingly, gassing is OK so long as it is someone we don't like getting gassed.
SilentStrider: Why do you think there was such a rush to name stuff after him? It's a subliminal thing. If people keep hearing his name associated with good things, they'll be less likely to believe the bad when it comes to light.

Naming airports after Reagan is utterly trolltastic.


Ok, thats fair

I'll tell you what. I will make you a deal

To prove to me that you are sincere in your convictions and that this isn't just a partisan attack then you must uphold the same standard to all presidents, right?

FDR shared military intel with the Soviets. Americans were well aware of Soviet atrocities. Should FDR be blamed for supporting Soviet atrocities in which American intel was used?
 
2013-08-26 08:56:53 AM  

cman: dr_blasto: cman: dr_blasto: cman: I don't see how he was doing anything evil

Nice try, however

So, supporting the chemical warfare against Iran was A-OK?

Even in spite of all our treaties, international law and claims that our system is morally superior?

"An Iranian victory is unacceptable" is not equal to "Gas the damn Iranians"

Yet, we took the road supporting the gas attacks on Iran - so, seemingly, gassing is OK so long as it is someone we don't like getting gassed.
SilentStrider: Why do you think there was such a rush to name stuff after him? It's a subliminal thing. If people keep hearing his name associated with good things, they'll be less likely to believe the bad when it comes to light.

Naming airports after Reagan is utterly trolltastic.

Ok, thats fair

I'll tell you what. I will make you a deal

To prove to me that you are sincere in your convictions and that this isn't just a partisan attack then you must uphold the same standard to all presidents, right?

FDR shared military intel with the Soviets. Americans were well aware of Soviet atrocities. Should FDR be blamed for supporting Soviet atrocities in which American intel was used?


Whoops. Forgot the deal part:

Here is my deal: I will recognize Reagan supporting genocide if you do the same for FDR
 
2013-08-26 09:00:47 AM  

cman: FDR shared military intel with the Soviets. Americans were well aware of Soviet atrocities. Should FDR be blamed for supporting Soviet atrocities in which American intel was used?


FDR did a ton of bad shiat. I'm curious, though, what US intel was used to help Soviets commit the atrocities? Are you referencing the atrocities Stalin committed on his own people or during the campaigns in WWII?

Were they any worse than Truman's bombing campaigns against cities like Dresden and Tokyo (Nagasaki and Hiroshima notwithstanding)?
 
2013-08-26 09:02:40 AM  

dr_blasto: cman: FDR shared military intel with the Soviets. Americans were well aware of Soviet atrocities. Should FDR be blamed for supporting Soviet atrocities in which American intel was used?

FDR did a ton of bad shiat. I'm curious, though, what US intel was used to help Soviets commit the atrocities? Are you referencing the atrocities Stalin committed on his own people or during the campaigns in WWII?

Were they any worse than Truman's bombing campaigns against cities like Dresden and Tokyo (Nagasaki and Hiroshima notwithstanding)?


All I am trying to do is feel you out to ensure that this is sincere and not some lame-ass attempt at partisan bashing.

If you can hold the same standards to every President then I will believe you
 
2013-08-26 09:03:11 AM  

cman: FDR shared military intel with the Soviets. Americans were well aware of Soviet atrocities. Should FDR be blamed for supporting Soviet atrocities in which American intel was used?


For all Stalin's atrocities, FDR was openly supporting a declared ally in a declared war, not slipping the Russians materiel under the table and walking away whistling.
 
2013-08-26 09:20:22 AM  

cman: dr_blasto: cman: FDR shared military intel with the Soviets. Americans were well aware of Soviet atrocities. Should FDR be blamed for supporting Soviet atrocities in which American intel was used?

FDR did a ton of bad shiat. I'm curious, though, what US intel was used to help Soviets commit the atrocities? Are you referencing the atrocities Stalin committed on his own people or during the campaigns in WWII?

Were they any worse than Truman's bombing campaigns against cities like Dresden and Tokyo (Nagasaki and Hiroshima notwithstanding)?

All I am trying to do is feel you out to ensure that this is sincere and not some lame-ass attempt at partisan bashing.

If you can hold the same standards to every President then I will believe you


OK.

I'm not certain, however, that either Reagan or FDR are guilty of genocide of any kind. I don't think the Iran/Iraq war made it anywhere near the threshold of genocide. During WWII, Germany certainly attempted genocide and this was well-tolerated by FDR and many other Western governments. I suppose that Germany's internal cleansing campaigns, none of which precipitated the US entry to the war were de facto supported by Western Europe and the US. It is a stain on our history, it also shows that even in the West, anti-semitism was fully condoned. FDR knew fully, as early as 1933, that Germany was going to mount a campaign of expelling and murdering people. When, in 1938, he was asked if he had any comment on the then-happening actions, his response was simply "no."

What transpired in the Iran/Iraq war were war crimes. Reagan fully supported Iraq's use of banned weaponry. Of course, he also sold arms to Iran.

These two things aren't really comparable. Blatant inaction, knowing full well the horrors going on in FDR's case; complete apathy for the plight of European Jewry. Disdain for the victims. On Reagan's part, actively supporting chemical attacks in a binary war - largely viewed as a proxy fight between the US and the USSR.
 
2013-08-26 09:22:36 AM  

dr_blasto: cman: FDR shared military intel with the Soviets. Americans were well aware of Soviet atrocities. Should FDR be blamed for supporting Soviet atrocities in which American intel was used?

FDR did a ton of bad shiat. I'm curious, though, what US intel was used to help Soviets commit the atrocities? Are you referencing the atrocities Stalin committed on his own people or during the campaigns in WWII?

Were they any worse than Truman's bombing campaigns against cities like Dresden and Tokyo (Nagasaki and Hiroshima notwithstanding)?


Japanese concen... er internment camps.

But let's be honest, folks. The Native Americans have been treated pretty badly by this country, too. Oh and all those Chinese we imported to build us railroads (and then they and their children were refused citizenship because ... um ...) Oh and that slavery thing. I'm sure Mexico is cool with how we've treated them, too.

We created an enemy out of Iran. Plain and simple. Reagan was just following tried and true methods of guaranteeing the US was top dog. Same with FDR. In fact, I'd suspect he wanted Stalin and Hitler to slug it out for as long as possible so they'd be too weak to be a power on the global stage.
 
2013-08-26 09:50:22 AM  
We need less stuff named after politicians and more after great Americans.

George Washington Carver, for example.
 
2013-08-26 09:53:36 AM  
subby thinks this is something bizarre and outrageous? We were covertly backing both sides from the beginning, and nobody's hands are clean. Not even Carter, who greenlit the Iran invasion via King Fahd. I guess he was expecting a different result than what happened when Ford and Carter backed Pol Pot via the Chinese.

Credit to the Clinton team who finally came around to realizing that trying to pit two evils against each other was pointless - which at least worked for a few years.

There's only so much batshiat we can contain over there.
 
2013-08-26 09:53:54 AM  

Aarontology: We need less stuff named after politicians and more after great Americans.

George Washington Carver, for example.


Politicians provide the funds with the naming rights attached, you want the government money, they want their name on it.
 
2013-08-26 09:58:21 AM  
Any president, and especially any that served two terms is going to have been part of some dark stuff.  We've had a massive military since the 40s and a lot of real and perceived threats to deal with, to go along with a lot of trade routes to defend for those that own them.  Satire or not, Chappelle Show's "Deep Impact" segment got into this, that the sh*t the POTUS gets briefed on and makes decisions on would make our heads spin daily.  Why do you think Obama has aged so fast and moderated so many of his positions towards Bush-continuation?  I'm not saying this is a good thing, but it is reality.

At least the feds usually wait until after the person has died before they start the naming spree.  In South Carolina, they feel the need to name everything after someone... highway interchanges, 3-block stretches of surface street, you name it.  But they bestow those names not only of the living but of the still-in-office types.  This has proven inconvenient at times.
 
2013-08-26 10:08:05 AM  

Nadie_AZ: dr_blasto: cman: FDR shared military intel with the Soviets. Americans were well aware of Soviet atrocities. Should FDR be blamed for supporting Soviet atrocities in which American intel was used?

FDR did a ton of bad shiat. I'm curious, though, what US intel was used to help Soviets commit the atrocities? Are you referencing the atrocities Stalin committed on his own people or during the campaigns in WWII?

Were they any worse than Truman's bombing campaigns against cities like Dresden and Tokyo (Nagasaki and Hiroshima notwithstanding)?

Japanese concen... er internment camps.

But let's be honest, folks. The Native Americans have been treated pretty badly by this country, too. Oh and all those Chinese we imported to build us railroads (and then they and their children were refused citizenship because ... um ...) Oh and that slavery thing. I'm sure Mexico is cool with how we've treated them, too.

We created an enemy out of Iran. Plain and simple. Reagan was just following tried and true methods of guaranteeing the US was top dog. Same with FDR. In fact, I'd suspect he wanted Stalin and Hitler to slug it out for as long as possible so they'd be too weak to be a power on the global stage.


Oh, yeah, internal policies were terrible too.

Also, everyone needs to remember that current Iran is a problem wholly created by the US. We've pretty much done the completely wrong thing there in every instance we've decided to involve ourselves.
 
2013-08-26 10:10:00 AM  

dr_blasto: Also, everyone needs to remember that current Iran is a problem wholly created by the US. We've pretty much done the completely wrong thing there in every instance we've decided to involve ourselves.


That is a good point.  Our nation-building efforts have reaped only resentment and pain.
 
2013-08-26 10:10:54 AM  

Aarontology: We need less stuff named after politicians and more after great Americans.

George Washington Carver, for example.


I would vote for an airport named after Huey P Newton.
 
2013-08-26 10:11:44 AM  

dr_blasto: Aarontology: We need less stuff named after politicians and more after great Americans.

George Washington Carver, for example.

I would vote for an airport named after Huey P Newton.


I think the Steve Jobs International Airport would be awesome for Cupertino, California
 
2013-08-26 10:20:44 AM  

factoryconnection: dr_blasto: Also, everyone needs to remember that current Iran is a problem wholly created by the US. We've pretty much done the completely wrong thing there in every instance we've decided to involve ourselves.

That is a good point.  Our nation-building efforts have reaped only resentment and pain.


shiat, our Iran adventure wasn't nation-building in any sense of the word. It was wholesale theft on behalf of western corporations. Since everything we sent Smedley Butler and his Marines to do worked so well, we decided to try it out in the Middle East.

And, you know what? It did work out well. The unpublicized goals were met. Just like corporations laying off staff just to make short term stock gains with no concern toward long-term profitability, many people saw immense gains to their bottom line. Nobody cared about long-term stability then, and there's no indication anyone really cares now.
 
2013-08-26 10:21:07 AM  

dr_blasto: So, supporting the chemical warfare against Iran was A-OK?


That's not what we did.  We supplied the location of the Iranian troops.  FTFA:

The U.S. authorized intelligence sharing with Iraq, and gave Iraq the location of those troops.

If you dig even deeper, the "official smoking gun CIA report" at Foreign Policy mentions both sides preparing for chemical warfare, and the Iraqis using tear gas.  From the "Comment" section:

The Iraqis used tear gas effectively two weeks ago to break up Iranian infantry assaults.  Iraqi artillery units probably were resupplied with tear gas for possible use against Iran's current infantry-led attack.

There is no reason to pull punches in a "code word" memo because it's not going to be made public.

Also, remember that Iraq chemical warfare capability didn't come from the United States.  It came from Germany (over 50% of the foreign chemical weapons equipment), France (over 20%), and a bunch of other nations like China and Brazil,   but pretty much none of the unambiguous Iraqi chemical weapons capability came from the US.  We did sell some dual-use stuff to the Iraqis, but it was relatively minor.

The big help we gave to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War wasn't weapons, it was satellite and signals intelligence.  And that was because Iran had farked us over and held our embassy personnel hostage just a few years prior, and considered us "The Great Satan".

Remember?

So, yeah, there really isn't a smoking gun here.  We told the Iraqis where the Iranians were.  Big deal.
 
2013-08-26 10:24:12 AM  
If selling arms to our enemies and using the proceeds to fund nun raping militants wasn't enough to sully Reagan's "good" name nothing ever will.  The same folks who created the imaginary Reagan that is worshiped today have begun sanding the rough corners of W's legacy.  It will be interesting to see if in my lifetime they are able to recreate even him as a conservative hero. I wouldn't think it possible but for the amazing job they did on Reagan.
 
2013-08-26 10:27:06 AM  

TwoHead: If selling arms to our enemies and using the proceeds to fund nun raping militants wasn't enough to sully Reagan's "good" name nothing ever will.  The same folks who created the imaginary Reagan that is worshiped today have begun sanding the rough corners of W's legacy.  It will be interesting to see if in my lifetime they are able to recreate even him as a conservative hero. I wouldn't think it possible but for the amazing job they did on Reagan.


You remember him for being an evil monster, and they remember him for being a hero.

You have evidence for his evilness, they have evidence for his heroism.

People see only what they want to see.
 
2013-08-26 10:27:54 AM  

cman: dr_blasto: cman: I don't see how he was doing anything evil

Nice try, however

So, supporting the chemical warfare against Iran was A-OK?

Even in spite of all our treaties, international law and claims that our system is morally superior?

"An Iranian victory is unacceptable" is not equal to "Gas the damn Iranians"


"Sure would be awful if these chemical weapons we taught you how to manufacture were used against the people that threw out our pro-Western dictatorial madman. I mean, we'd have to just sit here and do nothing while you straight up murdered a rival in violation of international rules of engagement."
 
2013-08-26 10:28:45 AM  
At the MN state fair this year, the GOP booth/building's main attraction is one of those wooden cutouts where you put your face in it and can have your picture taken with Reagan.

THIS is their main attraction.

Imagine how silly it would be if the DFL building had a Humphry or JFK cardboard cutout.

The TeaParty booth was my favorite. Poorly stenciled spray paint signs saying "Democrats bad!"
 
2013-08-26 10:28:48 AM  
The FBI building is naver after J Edgar Hoover, based on that Reagan seems safe.
 
2013-08-26 10:29:57 AM  
www2.gwu.edu
"Feel free to gas them good buddy!"
 
2013-08-26 10:30:17 AM  

JerkyMeat: It's common knowledge the right wing of this nation has created every enemy that we have today since ww2.


/what is really disappointing is that I posted this comment in the wrong thread...the thread above this one.

/Oh well, can't say it enough anyway.


You must have skipped over the rise of the Cold War in school.
 
2013-08-26 10:30:54 AM  
Ronald Reagan! Nerdrage!

farm4.staticflickr.com
 
2013-08-26 10:32:36 AM  
...came for Rummy shaking Saddam's hand. Guess I'll have to:

4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-08-26 10:33:17 AM  
...or I can get farked over by FarkedOver.
 
2013-08-26 10:35:06 AM  
Re-name ALL the airports after Reagan, so travelers can know how ol' Dutch felt near the end of his ride.
 
2013-08-26 10:35:21 AM  
But Reagan.

Doesn't make Obama's difficulties in Syria any easier.

Unfortunately.
 
2013-08-26 10:35:39 AM  

IlGreven: ...or I can get farked over by FarkedOver.


Great minds think alike my good sir!
 
2013-08-26 10:36:26 AM  
The Mississippi Reagan is our nation's largest reagan.
 
2013-08-26 10:36:57 AM  
Yeah, but Reagan's step-son eventually got around to killing Sadam for that, so it's all cool
 
2013-08-26 10:38:06 AM  
I still refer to it as "National Airport" rather than "Reagan National", since to me naming an airport after
Ronald Reagan is about the same as naming a Jewish Community center after Joseph Goebbels.

/Too soon?
 
2013-08-26 10:38:10 AM  

cman: I don't see how he was doing anything evil

Nice try, however


"President Reagan read the report and, according to Francona, wrote a note in the margin addressed to Secretary of Defense Frank C. Carlucci: "An Iranian victory is unacceptable."

Complicit in the use of chemical gas is okay in your book.

Got it.
 
2013-08-26 10:39:21 AM  
img600.imageshack.us
 
2013-08-26 10:39:30 AM  

diaphoresis: Ronald Reagan! Nerdrage!

[500x388 from http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3217/3083216765_3686f8a612.jpg image 500x388]


Look at him.  So stoic and honorable.  I bet he's boning Margaret Thatcher in Heaven!

/eagle sheds tear
 
2013-08-26 10:39:52 AM  

mediablitz: cman: I don't see how he was doing anything evil

Nice try, however

"President Reagan read the report and, according to Francona, wrote a note in the margin addressed to Secretary of Defense Frank C. Carlucci: "An Iranian victory is unacceptable."

Complicit in the use of chemical gas is okay in your book.

Got it.


Thanks for skipping the whole thread just to bash me instead of taking in everything in its context
 
2013-08-26 10:40:42 AM  

dittybopper: dr_blasto: So, supporting the chemical warfare against Iran was A-OK?

That's not what we did. We supplied the location of the Iranian troops. FTFA:

The U.S. authorized intelligence sharing with Iraq, and gave Iraq the location of those troops.


Other than the whole "yeah, he's using it. Don't say anything", SURE. We didn't support it.

Man. The things people will convince themselves of to justify maintaining a lie.
 
2013-08-26 10:41:16 AM  
It was ok because he didn't recall doing it, right?
 
Displayed 50 of 192 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report