Reagan

[dmb1996]

Why Do peolpe think he was a good president?

[Professional Russian]

He had great fucking speaches

[Carlsen]

.
I see him in film and I dont like him.





.

[Sugaree]

He had great fucking speaches

Speeches mean nothing.

[Professional Russian]

Speeches mean nothing.

I know bu still they were good. you got to admit that i have one lamminated hanging in my room

[WaffleSingSong]

A lot of things, he helped made a short economy boom, he had great charm, and he was quite a negotiator. For example, when some American citizens were kidnapped by some terrorist force, he said this.

"Ether you bring them back home, or we will bomb your hideout to death. Oh yes, we will kill them too, but we will kill a lot more of you!"

Hard to react to that, eh?

Also, he led the ending of the Cold War. He is really the only Republican president I actually like.

[Danny_boi 16]

He helped with the cold war greatly. But he wasn't all that great

[Jefflikespie]

A lot of things, he helped made a short economy boom, he had great charm, and he was quite a negotiator. For example, when some American citizens were kidnapped by some terrorist force, he said this.

"Ether you bring them back home, or we will bomb your hideout to death. Oh yes, we will kill them too, but we will kill a lot more of you!"

Hard to react to that, eh?

Also, he led the ending of the Cold War. He is really the only Republican president I actually like.

Regarding those hostages, what really happened was something shameful in my opinion. They exchanged weapons for the hostages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair

[Cicero]

Regarding those hostages, what really happened was something shameful in my opinion. They exchanged weapons for the hostages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair

Wikipedia isn't the best source in the world, thats why schools don't recommend Wikipedia. I don't see how it was shameful, trading weapons for hostages. I believe he did the right thing, human beings are more valuable than any weapon. IMO he was the best president we've had.

[Jefflikespie]

Tacitus,
My post is regarding the quote: "Ether you bring them back home, or we will bomb your hideout to death. Oh yes, we will kill them too, but we will kill a lot more of you!"

See how it differs from reality? Our nation doesn't cave in to terrorists or kidnappers, or at least that's what our policy used to be.

It is a historical fact that the crisis wasn't resolved by a threat from Reagan. He gave weapons to our enemies. No one disputes this, not even Reagan himself.

Of the other things mentioned here I agree especially his role in ending the cold war, but not regarding the hostages situation.

I'm curious, would you rate him above Lincoln as your most admired president?

[huginnmuninn]

Tacitus,
My post is regarding the quote: "Ether you bring them back home, or we will bomb your hideout to death. Oh yes, we will kill them too, but we will kill a lot more of you!"

See how it differs from reality? Our nation doesn't cave in to terrorists or kidnappers, or at least that's what our policy used to be.
.

people say that they wouldn't want our nation to negotiate with terrorists but what people say they want and what they really want are two different things entirely. If it would the cost the lives of a group of people not to negotiate with terrorists then people would rather negotiate because people value other people's lives over an ideology. Yes, some presidents in certain cases do manage to successfully defeat the terrorists without negotiating but it is usually because they are extremely sure that their plans will work because if the plans do not work they could be remembered as the president who caused the death of hostages. Very few would remember the fact the he/she didn't negotiate with the terrorists.
I honestly don't feel like posting on this thread again so PM me if you want to argue or whatever

[Jefflikespie]

people say that they wouldn't want our nation to negotiate with terrorists but what people say they want and what they really want are two different things entirely. If it would the cost the lives of a group of people not to negotiate with terrorists then people would rather negotiate because people value other people's lives over an ideology. Yes, some presidents in certain cases do manage to successfully defeat the terrorists without negotiating but it is usually because they are extremely sure that their plans will work because if the plans do not work they could be remembered as the president who caused the death of hostages. Very few would remember the fact the he/she didn't negotiate with the terrorists.
I honestly don't feel like posting on this thread again so PM me if you want to argue or whatever

You keep trying to justify it by claiming that it was to save lives?
If you read about the incident you will know that no lives were at stake. The kidnappers released the weak or sick, women and those they viewed as oppressed. This was a long time before Al-Qaeda. Do some research and then you'll understand. Casualties would have weakened their moral stance. It was all about politics and ideology.

Integrity and diplomacy over the quick fix of secretive bribes is what I'm referring to. Lives were not saved by giving them weapons nor lost if we hadn't.

[Zarakly]

Well, why is Obama such a great president?

[West Coast Sheriff]

He had great fucking speaches

A lot of things, he helped made a short economy boom, he had great charm, and he was quite a negotiator. For example, when some American citizens were kidnapped by some terrorist force, he said this.

"Ether you bring them back home, or we will bomb your hideout to death. Oh yes, we will kill them too, but we will kill a lot more of you!"

Hard to react to that, eh?

Also, he led the ending of the Cold War. He is really the only Republican president I actually like.

He also tore down the Berlin wall reuniting Germany

[Sugaree]

He also tore down the Berlin wall reuniting Germany

Reagan didn't do that. The people of East and West Berlin did that. Reagan was more of an advocate for the ending of the U.S.S.R.

EDIT: I like how someone neg rep'd me on this for not providing a source. This is common knowledge if you pay attention in fucking history class that it was social movements by Western Europe that helped bring the Berlin Wall down. Reagan was a very outspoken world figure when it came to the end of the Soviet Union, and his speech at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin propelled the non-Soviet European nations to end the U.S.S.R. If you can show me a picture of Reagan smashing down the Berlin Wall, I'll retract my claim (which is historically accurate).

[TheBigUnit]

Reagan was at the right place at the right time. Speeches help look at obama and Kennedy. The hostages were released partly bc Iranians hate Carter. Reagan said stuff that freaked his advisors " MR GORBACHAEV TEAR....." meaning his public opinion shot up bc ppl speculated him just like with obama and Kennedy. He really was the teflon President its partly bc we re in the deep s..t we re in now and our military spending beats theother top 4 combined

[Spock]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5D6RnMbfHI&feature=player_embedded#!

Thats why

[Neptune]

Speeches mean nothing.

Speeches mean a lot. That is how a lot of people get to power. That is how Hitler, Obama and countless others got to power (oh and I'm not comparing Obama to Hitler, just saying that he got to power by making good speeches just like Hitler did)

He also tore down the Berlin wall reuniting Germany

He didn't tear down the Berlin Wall. That had more to do with things that were happening in Europe.

Please use Multi-Quote instead of double posting. ~Bath

[Guillermo]

Speeches mean a lot.
Not if something isn't actually done. Hitler took over most of Europe by mid to late 1940s. Obama has done nothing but put the US in billions of more dollars in debt and raise the unemployment rate. He always talks about how he'll change all this in his speeches. Yeah, talk means a lot in this case.[/QUOTE]

[Carlsen]

Wikipedia isn't the best source in the world, thats why schools don't recommend Wikipedia. I don't see how it was shameful, trading weapons for hostages. I believe he did the right thing, human beings are more valuable than any weapon. IMO he was the best president we've had.

This question is about his presidency, not him being an actor, and he was a damn good one at that. Please enjoy this neg rep, and next time actually answer the question