BE PATIENT WITH ME. I COULD EASILY SAY SOMETHING WRONG SO JUST CORRECT ME.

Alrighty then. Let's see if I can condense this into a nutshell.

Up until 1979, Nicaragua (Central America, not South America, btw) was ruled by the US-supported Somoza dictatorship. In 1979, there was a revolution in Nicaragua, and the government was taken over by the Sandinistas. President Reagan viewed the Sandinista government as a communist threat, and approved a covert CIA operation to train and equip a force known as the Contras in order to overthrow the Sandinista government. I don't quite remember all the whys myself, but I know that supporting the Contras was not all that popular a thing either, because they were guilty of numerous human rights violations, including torture, rape and mutilation.

IT WOULD HAD TO BE 1980, CORRECT? WASN'T THAT WHEN REAGAN TOOK OFFICE?

I WAS TOLD THAT THE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS WAS COMMIE PROPAGANDA. DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? I DON'T WANT TO SOUND LIKE I'M NOT GONNA BELIEVE YOU, I'M TRYING TO PIECE IT TOGETHER.

So Congress passed something called the Boland Amendment, which made it illegal for the US to provide military support for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Nicaragua.

I WAS TOLD THAT IT WAS JUST THE LIBERALS REFUSING TO DO WHAT REAGAN WANTED, SIMILAR TO THE FILIBUSTERING THAT WAS GOING ON NOT TOO LONG AGO.

Now, it's 1985. Iran is at war with Iraq. There are U.S. hostages being held in Lebanon by Islamic Jihad, a pro-Iranian terrorist organization. The US was approached, I believe by Israel, to supply arms to the Iranians in exchange for money and for their assistance in securing the release of the US hostages.

The US agreed to provide these arms, despite the fact that a) there had been an arms embargo against Iran since 1979 when the US hostages were taken in Iran; b) there were UN sanctions in place against Iran; c) Reagan had taken a firm stance against terrorist countries and organizations and stated that the US would never make concessions to terrorists.

So, the US sold the arms to Iran, and funneled some of that money to the Contras in Nicaragua.

HOW I LOOK AT THIS SITUATION. HE WAS TRYING TO GET POWs OUT OF THE COUNTRY. THE BEST WAY TO DO SO IS WITH A TRADE. I ALSO THINK THAT, IF THE COMMIE. PROP. IS TRUE, THE FREEDOM FIGHTERS DESERVED THE HELP. I THINK THAT COMMUNISM IS EVIL AND IS WORTH GETTING RID OF. LETS ASSIST THE PEOPLE WHO AGREE.

NOW, I AM NOT HAPPY THAT WE HAD TO DO IT WITH IRAN, I JUST THINK THAT IRAN WOULD BE THE ONLY PLACE WHERE IT WOULDN'T BE TRACKED DOWN.

TOO BE HONEST, I THINK THAT SELLING ANYTHING TO IRAN WAS BAD. I WAS SHOCKED WHEN I HEARD THAT WE HAD. I AM STILL A LITTLE SHOCKED. I AM TRYING MY HARDEST TO KEEP REAGAN THE GOOD PRESIDENT THAT I THINK HE IS UNTIL I GET ALL THE FACTS STRAIGHT.

I don't have the stomach to call people who rape, torture, and mutilate other people "freedom fighters". But then again, I have strong feelings about this little thing called human rights. Agreed, Central America is not that far away from the US, but the fact of the matter is, Nicaragua was a very, very poor, very small country, and they were not exactly a threat to the US. Iran, on the other hand, was a hotbed for terrorists and had proven more than once that they were capable of direct acts of aggression against US citizens. 52 hostages were held for 14 months in Iran. I'm sorry, but to me, that is a very big deal.

AND I AGREE ABOUT IRAN BEING HORRIBLE. THAT IS WHY I'M HOLDING MY GROUND UNTIL EVERYTHING IS OUT. I NEED TO KEEP READING. BUT BEING TOLD THAT THE FREEDOM FIGHTERS WEREN'T THESE EVIL CREATURES AND THAT IT WAS COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA TO GIVE A REASON FOR THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT TO NOT HELP THEM, I CAN'T JUST CLOSE UP SHOP AND CALL REAGAN A BAD PRESIDENT. I THINK THERE IS MORE TO THE STORY THAN WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD.

My opinion is that the Reagan administration is responsible and therefore Reagan is responsible. That is my personal view about management in general.

Whats it called? Respondant Superior? Something like that. Let the Master Respond.

I don't want to get involved in any arguments, leastways not political ones, but I must take exception to your constant use of we and us. You seem to be speaking for an awfully lot of people, and frankly I don't care what they have to say or think, but am interested in what YOU say or think. It makes you sound as though you're just spewing campaign rhetoric.

Scott

For you, sub "me" in for "we" and "us." Does that make you feel better? But when the questions or the answers are about my party, then I say "we" and "us."

“Top Ten George W. Bush Complaints About "Fahrenheit 9/11":

10. That actor who played the President was totally unconvincing

9. It oversimplified the way I stole the election

8. Too many of them fancy college-boy words

7. If Michael Moore had waited a few months, he could have included the part where I get him deported

6. Didn't have one of them hilarious monkeys who smoke cigarettes and gives people the finger

5. Of all Michael Moore's accusations, only 97% are true

4. Not sure - - I passed out after a piece of popcorn lodged in my windpipe

3. Where the hell was Spider-man?

2. Couldn't hear most of the movie over Cheney's foul mouth

1. I thought this was supposed to be about dodgeball

I can laugh at this. And I did.

The freedom fighters were terrorists but they were attacking our enemy, not us.

And now it sounds like you are saying that communism is better then modern day Russia? Correct me if I'm wrong. We supported terrorists all in the name of defeating the communists. Sure, we "beat" the communists, but now we have to clean up the mess that we made in the process. Do you not think that the "mess" is a lot better then having Nukes pointed at us all the time? To be living in fear because some crazies in the USSR want to rule the world? Which do you perfer?

Don't be surprised if 10, 20, 50 years down the road we are in a war with this new government we just installed in Iraq. I don't think that it will be as big a chance of occuring as it would have if we had just pulled out after the war. The problem is Syria. I just hope that something is in place for the borders. We are keeping our troops there for that purpose, no?

Haha. I'm one of those lessor minded losers that likes watching all of my TV. So, I will probably go with full screen.

All I have heard you reference are Sean Hannity and Anne Coulter who are so right wing that they lean when they walk.

The difference is that they give you back up when they read. Like I said earlier, they give you reference points on everything they tell you. So, if one thinks its a lie, go and look it up. That way, right-winged ideals can be double checked with fact.

Terrorism is Terrorism! They were fighting the Russians, now they are fighting us. I can't argue with you any more as you are obviously not open to differing opinions. You will probably take this as a victory, I take it as trying to talk to a brick wall. Good Day to you, sir.

BTW, You might like watching all of your TV screen but by doing so you are missing 1/3 of the movie. That's ok, you are probably used to that.

Widescreen V. Pan & Scan

IT WOULD HAD TO BE 1980, CORRECT? WASN'T THAT WHEN REAGAN TOOK OFFICE?

Sorry I didn't state the year. The Nicaraguan revolution was in 1979, Reagan was elected in 1980 and took office in 1981. I'm pretty sure that the approval of the CIA operation to train the Contras was in 1981. Could have been 82, but I'm almost sure it was 81.

I WAS TOLD THAT THE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS WAS COMMIE PROPAGANDA

I dunno what to say about that. The human rights violations were widely reported by organizations like Amnesty International and Americas Watch. I suppose that these organizations could have been infiltrated by "commies", but it's rather unlikely. Have you ever done any work with human rights organizations? It is heartbreaking work, and there are plenty enough real atrocities happening around the world without manufacturing stuff.

Also, it is worth noting that in 1987 the World Court ruled that the US was guilty of supporting terrorist acts in Nicaragua and ordered the US to pay $17 billion to Nicaragua as reparation for lost lives and property. This ruling was ignored by Reagan. I guess that the World Court is also a victim of "commie propaganda".

HOW I LOOK AT THIS SITUATION. HE WAS TRYING TO GET POWs OUT OF THE COUNTRY

They weren't PoW's, they were hostages, plain and simple.

I JUST THINK THAT IRAN WOULD BE THE ONLY PLACE WHERE IT WOULDN'T BE TRACKED DOWN.

Nope. The arms deal specifically had to do with the fact that the hostages were being held in Lebanon by Islamic Jihad, which had close ties to Iran. You know that evil Ayatollah Khomeini that we just had to help Iraq fight? He's the same guy who was in power in Iran that we sold weapons to. As far as it not being tracked down, that certainly didn't work out, did it?

In the end, you will believe what you choose to believe. If you want to believe that the human rights violations perpetrated by the Contras in Nicaragua was all commie propaganda, that's what you will believe. If you want to believe that terrorism is perfectly ok in the quest to stamp out communism, that's what you will believe. We will have to agree to disagree.

(Edited to fix a typo)

How many of you have actually purchased tickets, and viewed it from beginning to end?

Because if you have not, then you really have nothing to say about it, do you?

And spare me the retelling of all the critiques, reviews, and columns you've read on the subject. The vast majority of THOSE were quite obviously written with either pro or anti agendas firmly in place before the first word was considered then written.

Is the film flawed? Desperately so. Do I agree with many of Moore's accusations? Of course. How can one deny "facts?"

Do I want to debate these points with people who HAVE NOT EVEN SEEN the movie ???????????????

Hell no!

(and I say this with all due respect to those HAVE seen it and HAVE posted here)

How many of you have actually purchased tickets, and viewed it from beginning to end?

Because if you have not, then you really have nothing to say about it, do you?

And spare me the retelling of all the critiques, reviews, and columns you've read on the subject. The vast majority of THOSE were quite obviously written with either pro or anti agendas firmly in place before the first word was considered then written.

Is the film flawed? Desperately so. Do I agree with many of Moore's accusations? Of course. How can one deny "facts?"

Do I want to debate these points with people who HAVE NOT EVEN SEEN the movie ???????????????

Hell no!

(and I say this with all due respect to those HAVE seen it and HAVE posted here)

I saw the movie last night, Mike. But I think this thread moved past the movie itself and into just plain politics quite some time ago, so your point is irrelevant. and to quote you from a separate post: "lighten up, dude."

Jim

Terrorism is Terrorism! They were fighting the Russians, now they are fighting us. I can't argue with you any more as you are obviously not open to differing opinions. You will probably take this as a victory, I take it as trying to talk to a brick wall. Good Day to you, sir.

BTW, You might like watching all of your TV screen but by doing so you are missing 1/3 of the movie. That's ok, you are probably used to that.

Widescreen V. Pan & Scan

I've complimented you all on the way you treated someone else with "differing opinion." I've also tried to keep my responses pretty mellow (or as mellow as politics can get). I've never been the first to point fingers at anyone else on this board. Why this all-of-a-sudden? This isn't the way you debate unless you are in third grade. You call me close-minded and a brick wall. Poor move. Why are you not these same things?

So, we, the US, are terrorists? This is a question. I ask because from what I've gathered, the Freedom Fighters were defending their country. They were defending it from the evading Communism. Would you not agree? So, defending your country with out a recognized military makes you a terrorist? Please, correct me if I'm wrong with out calling me close-minded and a brick wall.

If you thought that I was bashing Widescreen, you mis-took it. I don't care one way or the other, I buy whatever my hand grabs first, but I do perfer Full screen. My Unk got all defensive last year when I mentioned that I like Full screen better, too. I thought you were doing the same here. If I mis-took it, forgive me.

Happy 4th.

Sorry I didn't state the year. The Nicaraguan revolution was in 1979, Reagan was elected in 1980 and took office in 1981. I'm pretty sure that the approval of the CIA operation to train the Contras was in 1981. Could have been 82, but I'm almost sure it was 81.

TRAINING THE CONTRAS. THATS NEW AND INTERESTING. JEEZ, YOU GUYS ARE TEACHING ME SO MUCH. I WONDER IF THERE IS A BOOK OUT ABOUT THIS STUFF. I WOULD LIKE TO READ IT.

I dunno what to say about that. The human rights violations were widely reported by organizations like Amnesty International and Americas Watch. I suppose that these organizations could have been infiltrated by "commies", but it's rather unlikely. Have you ever done any work with human rights organizations? It is heartbreaking work, and there are plenty enough real atrocities happening around the world without manufacturing stuff.

WELL, NO. I'M ONLY 20. SO, I HAVEN'T.

Also, it is worth noting that in 1987 the World Court ruled that the US was guilty of supporting terrorist acts in Nicaragua and ordered the US to pay $17 billion to Nicaragua as reparation for lost lives and property. This ruling was ignored by Reagan. I guess that the World Court is also a victim of "commie propaganda".

I HAVEN'T HEARD THAT EITHER. WILL HAVE TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT.

They weren't PoW's, they were hostages, plain and simple.

YEAH, YEAH. MY MISTAKE. I WAS TRYING TO THINK OF ANOTHER WORD FOR HOSTAGES, AND THAT CAME OUT.

Nope. The arms deal specifically had to do with the fact that the hostages were being held in Lebanon by Islamic Jihad, which had close ties to Iran. You know that evil Ayatollah Khomeini that we just had to help Iraq fight? He's the same guy who was in power in Iran that we sold weapons to. As far as it not being tracked down, that certainly didn't work out, did it?

In the end, you will believe what you choose to believe. If you want to believe that the human rights violations perpetrated by the Contras in Nicaragua was all commie propaganda, that's what you will believe. If you want to believe that terrorism is perfectly ok in the quest to stamp out communism, that's what you will believe. We will have to agree to disagree.

(Edited to fix a typo)

NO, NO. I BELIEVE WHAT I'M TOLD. I BELIEVE YOU. BUT WHEN I'M TOLD SOMETHING ON THE SIDE AS WELL, FROM SOMEONE I KNOW AND TRUST, THEN I'M GOING TO BELIEVE THEM OVER YOU OR ANYONE ON THIS BOARD. THE PROBLEM WAS THAT HE DIDN'T KNOW THE WHOLE SITUATION SO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS NEW TO ME.

I HAVE NEVER BEEN TOLD ANYTHING ABOUT THIS AND I'M CURIOUS. I WAS TOLD THAT THE AYATOLLAH WAS BAD AND THAT PUTTING HIM OUT OF POWER WAS A GOOD THING. THEN I'M TOLD THIS. I'M REALLY IN THE MIDDLE NOW. THE WHOLE, "IT WOULDN'T GET TRACKED DOWN" THING WAS ME TRYING TO THINK OF REASON WHY THIS HAPPEND.

TO CLEAR SOMETHING UP. YOU ARE CALLING IRAN THE TERRORISTS, CORRECT? NOT THE FREEDOM FIGHTERS. I STILL DON'T SEE THE FREEDOM FIGHTERS AS TERRORISTS. YOU COULD CHANGE THAT BUT I'M STANDING BY THAT NOW.

NO ARGUMENT FROM ME ON THIS POST.