Posted on Apr 3, 2015
Iran Contra. What did the POTUS know, but not know? Were they right providing arms to Iran in exchange for prisoners?
6.05K
29
27
1
1
0
I started this discussion because a lot of people have brought up this subject. Trading arms for HOSTAGES is a tad bit different than releasing 5 Gitmo Detainees for a deserter! To me, that's just insane.
So here is a little sneak peek:
Reagan supplied weapons to Iran for a hostage exchange. Israel joins in and offers to send 500 hawk surface to air missiles to release the rest of the American Hostages held in Lebanon. All hostages were released.
Afterwards, Hezbollah decides to take MORE hostages and no other demands were met.
National Security Council's final report stated the Reagan could not control S/LPD (Office of Public Diplomacy for Latin America and the Caribbean) and had no knowledge of the weapons transactions. S/LPD reported DIRECTLY to Oliver North.
Against strong opposition, the Dem controlled congress enacted the Boland Amendments that prohibited the defense department or CIA from providing military aid to the Contras. So, Reagan went thru NSC to supervise covert military aid.
So here is a little sneak peek:
Reagan supplied weapons to Iran for a hostage exchange. Israel joins in and offers to send 500 hawk surface to air missiles to release the rest of the American Hostages held in Lebanon. All hostages were released.
Afterwards, Hezbollah decides to take MORE hostages and no other demands were met.
National Security Council's final report stated the Reagan could not control S/LPD (Office of Public Diplomacy for Latin America and the Caribbean) and had no knowledge of the weapons transactions. S/LPD reported DIRECTLY to Oliver North.
Against strong opposition, the Dem controlled congress enacted the Boland Amendments that prohibited the defense department or CIA from providing military aid to the Contras. So, Reagan went thru NSC to supervise covert military aid.
Iran
Terrorism
Edited 11 y ago
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 6
5
5
0
SGT (Join to see)
The Iran-Contra Affair had a legitimate purpose and posed no danger to the United States.
The trade of enemy combatants to the enemy in time of war to repatriate an Army deserter who was allegedly held captive by people he willingly turned himself into is tantamount, in my opinion, to treason.
There is no legitimate way to draw a parallel between the two.
The Iran-Contra Affair had a legitimate purpose and posed no danger to the United States.
The trade of enemy combatants to the enemy in time of war to repatriate an Army deserter who was allegedly held captive by people he willingly turned himself into is tantamount, in my opinion, to treason.
There is no legitimate way to draw a parallel between the two.
(5)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
EXACTLY! To compare the two is insane. We also have people arguing that the POTUS brought the deserter home so that he could be prosecuted. I don't think that was ever expressed... Matter of fact I know that wasn't expressed.
(0)
(0)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
The Obama Sheeple will try to spin anything that makes their inept, corrupt, racist, immoral administration look good. It is a wonder they don't screw themselves into Hell with all the spinning they do.. :-)
(4)
(0)
2
2
0
I LOVE CONTRA...Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Select, Start!!!! 99 lives
Oh..Sorry...Forgot to read the rest...LOL....My brain isn't that big....
Oh..Sorry...Forgot to read the rest...LOL....My brain isn't that big....
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I'll have to get back with you on this. LTC North is supposed to be making a guest appearance next weekend at the National NRA convention in Nashville, TN. I want to try and get a pic with him. I'll ask him....lol
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
It is stated that the S/LPD reported directly to Oliver North. (Office or Public Diplomacy for Latin America and the Caribbean)
The "Boland Amendments" were enacted by the Dem Controlled congress. It prohibited the defense department or CIA from providing military aide to the Contras.
The "Boland Amendments" were enacted by the Dem Controlled congress. It prohibited the defense department or CIA from providing military aide to the Contras.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SFC (Join to see) yes he was a very willing fall guy over this, BUT who did he have to answer to at higher levels?
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) . He said they all knew. Lol. He's a short guy lol. Very friendly though talked with him for about 10 minutes. He didn't have much good to say about current Iran deal..lol. That's me,the wife and LTC North.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
All I did was Handle the Messages. As a Navy Spook not really hung up on black and white, Right Wrong except on the Contra end of the deal. We sold Repair Parts to the Iranians for US Weapons Systems they got from the US Propped Up Shah when the Gov't Failed. No matter what Govt's and Presidents say and do in Public there is always some shady back room deals going on. That is Just Reality. My problem was the other end. U.S. Gov't can't show a Profit on anything especially and Illegal Operation so the Money was given to the Contra's, Right Wing Death Squads that had no problem Murdering and Raping Catholic Nuns and Priests for daring to Preach Social Justice. I was a good Catholic Boy and something about that always did rub me wrong.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Veronica, Sins of the Father: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/reagan-iran/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair
After a leak by Iranian Mehdi Hashemi, the Lebanese magazine Ash-Shiraa exposed the arrangement on November 3, 1986.[49] This was the first public reporting of the weapons-for-hostages deal. The operation was discovered only after an airlift of guns (Corporate Air Services HPF821) was downed over Nicaragua. Eugene Hasenfus, who was captured by Nicaraguan authorities, initially alleged in a press conference on Nicaraguan soil that two of his coworkers, Max Gomez and Ramon Medina, worked for the Central Intelligence Agency.[50] He later said he did not know whether they did or not.[51] The Iranian government confirmed the Ash-Shiraa story, and ten days after the story was first published, President Reagan appeared on national television from the Oval Office on November 13, stating:
"My purpose was... to send a signal that the United States was prepared to replace the animosity between [the U.S. and Iran] with a new relationship... At the same time we undertook this initiative, we made clear that Iran must oppose all forms of international terrorism as a condition of progress in our relationship. The most significant step which Iran could take, we indicated, would be to use its influence in Lebanon to secure the release of all hostages held there."[10]
The scandal was compounded when Oliver North destroyed or hid pertinent documents between November 21 and November 25, 1986.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair
After a leak by Iranian Mehdi Hashemi, the Lebanese magazine Ash-Shiraa exposed the arrangement on November 3, 1986.[49] This was the first public reporting of the weapons-for-hostages deal. The operation was discovered only after an airlift of guns (Corporate Air Services HPF821) was downed over Nicaragua. Eugene Hasenfus, who was captured by Nicaraguan authorities, initially alleged in a press conference on Nicaraguan soil that two of his coworkers, Max Gomez and Ramon Medina, worked for the Central Intelligence Agency.[50] He later said he did not know whether they did or not.[51] The Iranian government confirmed the Ash-Shiraa story, and ten days after the story was first published, President Reagan appeared on national television from the Oval Office on November 13, stating:
"My purpose was... to send a signal that the United States was prepared to replace the animosity between [the U.S. and Iran] with a new relationship... At the same time we undertook this initiative, we made clear that Iran must oppose all forms of international terrorism as a condition of progress in our relationship. The most significant step which Iran could take, we indicated, would be to use its influence in Lebanon to secure the release of all hostages held there."[10]
The scandal was compounded when Oliver North destroyed or hid pertinent documents between November 21 and November 25, 1986.
WGBH American Experience . Reagan | PBS
General Article: The Iran-Contra Affair
(0)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
The minor weapons were for Contras that would come by ship which landed in Panama and weapons were transported North to the Contras and some were transported South to the Colombian cartels and rebels, the weapons that were sent south were by orders of Noriega.
(0)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
The following arms were supplied to Iran:[29][30]
August 20, 1985 – 96 TOW anti-tank missiles
September 14, 1985 – 408 more TOWs
November 24, 1985 – 18 Hawk anti-aircraft missiles
February 17, 1986 – 500 TOWs
February 27, 1986 – 500 TOWs
May 24, 1986 – 508 TOWs, 240 Hawk spare parts
August 4, 1986 – More Hawk spares
October 28, 1986 – 500 TOWs
August 20, 1985 – 96 TOW anti-tank missiles
September 14, 1985 – 408 more TOWs
November 24, 1985 – 18 Hawk anti-aircraft missiles
February 17, 1986 – 500 TOWs
February 27, 1986 – 500 TOWs
May 24, 1986 – 508 TOWs, 240 Hawk spare parts
August 4, 1986 – More Hawk spares
October 28, 1986 – 500 TOWs
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
By the way, as a point of order here; it was not "arms for hostages." The arms were "sold" (not traded) to the Iranians, in exchange for their "influence" over those that had taken the hostages. The Iranians did not have the hostages. It was purely political, to suggest otherwise..
(0)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
Ernest, it is not the hostages that is relevant it is the arms that were sent to the Contras with some shipments sent to the cartels and guerrillas in Colombia, that is followed by crazy stuff that is part of our history to which am a part of.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
It's the same old story. The less pandering or adventures in the middle east, the better. They have their tribe they are always looking out for, and on top of that, usually that entails the same social of elites and their kids. Half the reason why the Iraqi Army broke apart in the first place was for the fact that the incumbent government there had so little legitimacy and buy-in with the Iraqi troops that they were going to break ranks to join their buddies at the first opportunity.
The Iranian situation is the same broken record on a different record player. Every time you think you have a deal, or some sort of break through, wait a few months, something falls apart and we are left holding the baggage. Its how Middle East people play folks, there are enough deployments among us to figure this out. You'll think you are making progress, but all the sudden, something happens to destroy it.
Iran Contra, funding the Mujahideen, the break up of the Iraqi Army, and so on, it all fits a pattern. We always have these Ivy-league educated types that think they just know better than human nature and think they are showing more intelligence and leadership than what an honest player would conclude. And every time they do these back room deals, they walk away thinking their Ivy-league degrees got them some understanding that somehow saves the day. Then a decade later, their same deal leads to war and chaos. Enough's enough. Just stop dealing with them, if there are negotiations to be done, do it so we can pack up and leave them already.
The Iranian situation is the same broken record on a different record player. Every time you think you have a deal, or some sort of break through, wait a few months, something falls apart and we are left holding the baggage. Its how Middle East people play folks, there are enough deployments among us to figure this out. You'll think you are making progress, but all the sudden, something happens to destroy it.
Iran Contra, funding the Mujahideen, the break up of the Iraqi Army, and so on, it all fits a pattern. We always have these Ivy-league educated types that think they just know better than human nature and think they are showing more intelligence and leadership than what an honest player would conclude. And every time they do these back room deals, they walk away thinking their Ivy-league degrees got them some understanding that somehow saves the day. Then a decade later, their same deal leads to war and chaos. Enough's enough. Just stop dealing with them, if there are negotiations to be done, do it so we can pack up and leave them already.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
I agree that Iran is a shady Country... that's the main reason I don't believe there should any negotiations in regards to "nuclear power." Something will happen within the year. Promise
(1)
(0)
SPC Angel Guma
Yeah...pretty much, the moment there were 'negotiations' on anything, we already lost the game. To have a quid pro quo like that means both sides are going to reason out their differences equitably. I don't know why, but the US is always hiring lackluster negotiators. We are chronically short on people with basic language expertise and cultural depth, and all the red flags of being haggled are constantly missed. And this isn't just with Iran, China has haggled us like a fiddle for years too. Just a few years ago, Iran state media was boasting to the world about their first dedicated spy satellites put into orbit...we've been doing that for decades. They know in the nuclear game, all it takes is one bomb, not a hundred or a thousand, for a reliable deterrent to work. Then it will only take a revolution to get the Mullahs out...and who's gonna feel safe knowing a country's nuclear stockpile is about to go up for grabs by revolutionaries that may be worse than the old guard they are replacing.
To make matters worse, the real decision making people on our side are always filled with top level managers that really have absolutely no core critical skills in what they need for the job, while they have staff scurrying about that do have the skills but are in no consequential position to do anything. Why Kerry and Hillary Clinton are continually trusted with high level managerial positions in government are beyond me. Neither speak half way decent Arabic or Farsi, two crucial languages needed just to do business with the Middle East, both have a long track record of out right scheming, Hillary Clinton above all. Apple and Microsoft wouldn't dream of hiring a high level executive director of a major operational branch without at least some street credibility in their jobs, but how the Clinton's, Kerry, and their ilk continually get away with this is beyond me. The real injustice of it all, is that this happens decade after decade and no one bothers to ask questions out of fear of their jobs, or something.
To make matters worse, the real decision making people on our side are always filled with top level managers that really have absolutely no core critical skills in what they need for the job, while they have staff scurrying about that do have the skills but are in no consequential position to do anything. Why Kerry and Hillary Clinton are continually trusted with high level managerial positions in government are beyond me. Neither speak half way decent Arabic or Farsi, two crucial languages needed just to do business with the Middle East, both have a long track record of out right scheming, Hillary Clinton above all. Apple and Microsoft wouldn't dream of hiring a high level executive director of a major operational branch without at least some street credibility in their jobs, but how the Clinton's, Kerry, and their ilk continually get away with this is beyond me. The real injustice of it all, is that this happens decade after decade and no one bothers to ask questions out of fear of their jobs, or something.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google