• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

McCain: Reagan didn't negotiate with Iran (!)

Cello Man

Graduate Poster
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
1,035
There goes Johnny again...

John McCain said:
“I believe that it’s not an accident that our hostages came home from Iran when President Reagan was president of the United States. He didn’t sit down in a negotiation with the religious extremists in Iran, he made it very clear that those hostages were coming home.'’

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/15/mccain-agrees-with-bushs-remarks/

Where's Joe Lieberman when you need him? It seems that McCain's Reagan worship is obscuring his memory of the Iran Contra scandal.
 
To be fair, Reagan didn't negotiate with religious extremists in Iran over the hostage crisis. He did that later on.

It was Jimmy Carter's administration that negotiated with Iran that lead to the hostages' release. And, yes, it was an accident that it happened during Reagan's Presidency. If it had happened a few minutes earlier, it would have been in Carter's.
 
There goes Johnny again...
John McCain said:
“I believe that it’s not an accident that our hostages came home from Iran when President Reagan was president of the United States. He didn’t sit down in a negotiation with the religious extremists in Iran, he made it very clear that those hostages were coming home.'’
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/15/mccain-agrees-with-bushs-remarks/

Where's Joe Lieberman when you need him? It seems that McCain's Reagan worship is obscuring his memory of the Iran Contra scandal.
Technically, he's correct. Reagan didn't sit down with them. It was one of his lackeys.

But in spite of what Upchurch says, I find that it strains credulity to think that Iran didn't cut some sort of deal with president-elect Reagan so the hostages would come home when Reagan was president. As I recall, the release had been a done deal for several weeks before the inauguration, but for some (never explained) reasons it kept being put off. (Maybe Nancy had consulted her numerologist and they agreed that 444 days was a perfect number of days for hostage holding. ;) ) I also seem to remember that a number of the hostages were furious with Reagan for making them stay as political pawns for his showmanship. Was it an "accident" that the kidnappers' timing was so perfect for Reagan, then miraculously, a few month later, Reagan sells them arms?

Call me a CT kook, but something doesn't smell kosher there.
 
My whole point is that this whole "Negotiation = Appeasement" nonsense from the Republicans in the last couple of days really seems like a big stretch.

Obama rejects the notion that not talking to hostile countries somehow punishes them, and the reaction on the Right is to make it seem like we never ever talk with anyone that isn't on our "A" list.

For one thing, negotiation, really firm negotiation does not equal appeasement. And exactly where the hell did Obama say his goal is to appease everyone? He has said quite clearly, and on many occasions that Iran cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. Period.

Where Democrats and Republicans seem to differ is how to go about keeping this from happening. A lot of people on the Right have trigger fingers that just plain make me nervous. If war is simply an extension of politics by different means, why not do everything we can to keep it from going to that next level, which costs so much more in terms of our nations' economy and human life?

I'm very much a believer in "Talk softly and carry a big stick". It just seems to me that people these days are too eager to omit the first part of that phrase.
 
Last edited:
But in spite of what Upchurch says, I find that it strains credulity to think that Iran didn't cut some sort of deal with president-elect Reagan so the hostages would come home when Reagan was president. As I recall, the release had been a done deal for several weeks before the inauguration, but for some (never explained) reasons it kept being put off.
Fair enough.


"in spite"? Have I offended?
 
Reagan "didn't recall" negotiating through third parties on the Iran Contra Lebanon Hostages matter.

That doesn't mean his Branch of government didn't, and Oliver North, as well as an international wheeler dealer named Bonifar, seem to have made some hay while the sun shone on Reagan's nap time.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom