“These gentlemen [Afgan Fighters] are the moral equivalents of America’s Founding Fathers” ~President Ronald Reagan 1985
‘In 1982, Ronald Reagan dedicated the Space Shuttle Columbia to the resistance fighters [Taliban] in Afghanistan.’
22 thoughts on “for the Reagan Republicans in the room…”
Comments are closed.
…and in 1951 he was in bed with a monkey.
http://www.bluecorncomics.com/pics/bonzo.jpg
The guy has a pretty impressive resume. I can see why he has been re-branded into the God he is today O_o
And Obama snorted cocaine. What’s your point? Even mentioning Reagan’s worst movie is better than that.
I guess you conveniently forgot the resume part about helping to end the cold war, cutting taxes, and giving the nation a good long economic boom, along with restoring confidence in our country after Jimmy Carter’s malaise.
I didnt forget any of that, but NONE of that actually happened so I didnt bring it up! Remember what I brought up about reagan revisionist history, you made my point!
I was addressing Annie bringing up Bonzo.
But since you mentioned, none of that happened? Oh, the cold war is still going on? Reagan DIDN’T cut taxes? The economy was in a recession/depression throughout the 80s and 90s?
You’re losing in Proud Progressive.
The Taliban did not exist until the 90s.
They didn’t take power until 1996.
Granted some of the “freedom fighters” later joined the Taliban— but most did not.
I believe that Reagan quote was made in reference to the Nicaraguan Contras, not the Afghan Mujahadeen.
I meant the quote about them being the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers, not the dedication of the space shuttle.
Saddam Hussein in the early ’80s, meeting with Donald Rumsfeld: GOOD.
Saddam Hussein in the early ’90s, invading Kuwait: EVIL.
Saddam Hussein from 1992-2001: IRRELEVANT.
(And of course now, DEAD.)
Mujahadeen in the early ’80s, receiving CIA money: GOOD.
Mujahadeen after the Soviets withdrew: IRRELEVANT.
Mujahadeen become the Taliban: BAD.
Taliban-Enron deal: GOOD.
Taliban after 9/11: EVIL.
(Based roughly on the Infinite Jest American Crusade 2001+ trading cards.)
Nicely done.
Because things never ever change over time? That’s just stupid. In the 80s Saddam was the enemy of our enemy Iran. In the 90s he was destablizing the Middle East and oil interests (which every administration in the 20th century said they would defend, it just happened to be that Bush41 was the one who had to do it).
Are you saying our relationships with other nations and entities should never change? Should we still have a cold war against Russia?
How about this one as far as liberals go:
JFK: tax cuts good
Reagan: bad
Bush: devil
NOT nicely done.
The liberals are so desperate they are dragging up 20 year old out of context quotes. They understand they have failed America the last 4 years and are now on the verge of historical losses in the next election so they try to smear with lies and half truths.
History is always worth examining. Viewed impartially, it can provide guidance. A partisan person accusing the “other side” of using smears and half-truths is a pitiful and willful ignorance of “his side’s” past and present actions.
I never have figured out how using am actual quote from a right Wing loon was a half truth.
Because he was not talking about the Taliban and the vast majority of the Afghan Mujahadeen that he was referencing did not join the Taliban. The Taliban were formed from Pakistani students.
Jason’s comment and the irony of Reagan’s words basically illustrates the complexity of international realtions. The reality is that someone or some group of people may be your enemy today and your friend tomorrow…and vice versa. It would be naive and ignorant to think things never change.
Jason, why not add: 1776 British Blockade of Charles Town=Evil, 2003 England Joins US Coalition=Good…perhaps it doesn’t conveniently fit your anti-Republican meme.
Zach, is your post meant to insult Reagan? Sounds like it. Tell me, should we have been rooting for the Soviets to conquer Afghanistan? Perhaps we should have just remained silent?
Roland, it’s not my post so I can’t really speak to what the intent was. Ask the author.
The point of the post is to show that reagan was far from the saint that revisionist republican history has led many to believe.
The analogy couldnt of been worse, alot has happened in 234 years that has changed the British/American relationship. How much has happened in 30 years to change the Pakistani /American relationship. O yea Osama Bin Laden went from being our friend to the person responsible for 3000+ American deaths.
Here is a novel idea, instead of trying to prop up the Russians as bogeymen to win elections, and then leave Pakistan in the dust afterwards. Maybe we should of built up Pakistan after wars with Schools, hospitals etc…
This comment further shows how little you know of the situation in South Asia. While the relationship between Pakistan and the US has ebbed and flowed they have always been close. Now I know why you misinterpreted a Reagan quote from almost 30 years ago.
Just a clarification, I am not a fan of Reagan.
PP- And you apparently missed the $7.5 Billion in economic, not military, aid over 5 year that was directed at Pakistan early this year. That is exactly what the US is doing in Pakistan right now, but instead of just schools and hospitals they are helping Pakistanis create businesses and encouraging US businesses to invest in Pakistan.
Apparently you are hung up on a Reagan quote from 30 years ago to try to make people look bad.
Sorry to have insulted you Zach…
So, P.P….apparently you saw nothing wrong with the USSR invading Afghanistan for the purpose of annexing it, but can you clarify what do you think the US should have done about it?
A) Nothing.
B) Gone in with our own troops and fought the Soviets.
C) Harsh rhetoric and UN sanctions.
D) Support the resistance fighters.
E) Other-please specify
You didn’t insult me, Roland; I was simply pointing out that I didn’t write the post, just as I don’t write everything that appears here at Blogging Blue.