12 thoughts on “A little something…”

  2. Chico, porque no le salio de sus realisimos cojones.
    What kind of ignoramus question is that? He was a little busy with the USSR, if you recall. If you’re tryin’ to gin something up, it ain’t gonna work…

  3. Cuba?? Um, in addition to eradicating communism in the USSR, wasn’t he also busy trying to wipe it out of Central America, a movement organized, executed and funded by, Oh I don’t know…
    SATAN?
    I mean castro.
    God, I miss that man.
    Claudia

  5. When the two castros die, do y’all think that we should make Cuba the 51st state? What do y’all think about that? It could prevent another revolution from happening.

  6. What a contrast to that of his predecessor in overalls or of Mrs. Carter in her bare feet while at a White House reception! Reagan was not only a great leader, he brought back dignity and class to the Office of the Prez.

  7. Venti, I may have to disagree with you. As much as I admire and revere the memory of RWR, he (like many) did not understand the threat that radical Islam was to the world. The first of two times I was livid at RWR was after the bombing in Lebanon of the Marine Corps barracks. We fled, and we should have stayed and kicked their asses then. And I mean “kick their fucking asses,” not targeted little pinprick attacks. Most of the countries in the Middle East were client states of the USSR. He may have understood the region in that context.
    With the collapse of the USSR in 1991, however, the Islamists became hungry again for the Caliphate. After all, they had defeated the Soviet, why not us. What we need is a Reagan for this generation, one that understands this new threat, a threat that, in many ways, is more dangerous than the one we faced in the Cold War.

  8. Though fighting communism is a noble cause, is Reagan not guilty of terrorism by supporting the contras attack on “soft” targets much like Castro’s people did towards the end of the revolution?
    Supporting Rios Montt is not supporting terrorism? What about the genocide of the Mayan people? It didn’t have to got that way. Reagan knew very little of Latin America. It could have been handled better. He’s very guilty of supporting atrocities. There is never a reason to support scorched earth policies like those in Guatemala.
    If you support that fine. But lets not lie about what many of the actions were – terrorism. And he lied about Rios Montt supporting democracy. Again if you support these actions, I disagree, but lets not lie that crimes were committed. If you feel this crimes were necessary, you are entitled to that opinion. Don’t sugar coat the horrible crimes committed.

  9. Fielding, please. Go back to reading Earth in the Balance while sipping your herbal tea. I once heard a student say that dropping the A-Bomb on Hiroshima was an act of terrorism. I guess he was as deluded and naive as you are in thinking that you can deal with an implacable enemy by throwing potpourri baskets of patchouli at them.
    The only thing Reagan is guilty of is not going in guns blazing and wiping out the reds the way they’d wipe us out if given half a chance. Maybe a Ph.D. like Tony de la Cova can enlighten us on the issues you raise.

  12. George,
    I’m sure Dr. de la Cova can weigh in with what I said in more detail. Reagan either lied in his support for Rios Montt, or was clueless of what was happening in Guatemala. I’m sure the Dr. could give you the details of the atrocities and systematic killings by the military.
    If you support that, I completely disagree with you as using that as a way to fight the guerrillas. But if you tell me it didn’t happen, and there was democracy, that is rewriting history.

Comments are closed.