Full Version: Parallels between Iraq/Iran and Iran/Contra
Greg Grandin, the author of Empire's Workshop: Latin America, The United States, and The Rise of the New Imperialism, has published an article detailing the parallels between the extra-legal policies practice in the 1980s in Central America with those used in the "War on Terror." He also points out that many of the same actors perform a role in both settings. (See this Article introduced by Tom Egelhardt).
1. Is the thesis of the article plausible? Why or why not?
2. What is your explanation for the reappearance of so many of the same characters so many years later?
3. As a general issue, do you think the failure to thoroughly explore and expose contemporary scandals often leads to worse ramification later in time?
QUOTE
What became known as "Iran-Contra," however, was much more than an illegal arms deal. It was the New Right's first concerted campaign to restore to the executive branch the power to wage unaccountable war, to override congressional scrutiny, and go on the ideological and military offensive in a place where, unlike in Vietnam, there was no major power to get in the way.
1. Is the thesis of the article plausible? Why or why not?
2. What is your explanation for the reappearance of so many of the same characters so many years later?
3. As a general issue, do you think the failure to thoroughly explore and expose contemporary scandals often leads to worse ramification later in time?
1. Is the thesis of the article plausible? Why or why not?
You're kidding, right? All we have to do is examine the language used to determine it isn't very plausible and doesn't even pretend to be.
The author links so many things together, despite their disparate players, to be completely unconvincing. Foggo drew on his "young Republican" contacts to get a place in the CIA in the 1980s? Sources please? And I haven't heard any conservative ever call Ronald Reagan a useful idiot. Maybe I missed the memo...
Then there's the "radicalization" of the House of Representatives in the 1980s "under Reagan".
Of course, the reference to Jim McDermott's warning against martial law, internment camps, and the suspension of the Constitution provides the author with sooo much credibility in the eyes of the clear-minded.
2. What is your explanation for the reappearance of so many of the same characters so many years later?
The same explanation as to why Bob Shrum keeps running political campaigns: it's what they do. If a Democrat is elected President in 2008 and he (or she) appoints Bill Clinton to be Ambassador to the UN, will we all be shocked and complain about some left-wing conspiracy?
But really, are there really "so many" characters reappearing? The evidence just isn't there.
3. As a general issue, do you think the failure to thoroughly explore and expose contemporary scandals often leads to worse ramification later in time?
The strict answer to this is yes--failure to investigate scandals does lead to more of the same into the future.
But was Iran-Contra glossed over during the 1980s? Was it a mere footnote in history?
Have we been in bed with Iran since the Reagan administration and all of this Bush saber rattling is a mere front for the real position of the United States?
Is the United States itself responsible for the current Iranian nuclear research program? After all, we provided TOW missiles to them in the 80s.
Were the Sandanistas even Communists at all? Was opposing them related to the Cold War in any way?
Does John Poindexter's 9 month stint in the Bush 43 administration really tell us anything? Did Otto Reich ever do anything significant inside the current administration? The stretching here is pretty astounding.
You're kidding, right? All we have to do is examine the language used to determine it isn't very plausible and doesn't even pretend to be.
The author links so many things together, despite their disparate players, to be completely unconvincing. Foggo drew on his "young Republican" contacts to get a place in the CIA in the 1980s? Sources please? And I haven't heard any conservative ever call Ronald Reagan a useful idiot. Maybe I missed the memo...
Then there's the "radicalization" of the House of Representatives in the 1980s "under Reagan".
Of course, the reference to Jim McDermott's warning against martial law, internment camps, and the suspension of the Constitution provides the author with sooo much credibility in the eyes of the clear-minded.
2. What is your explanation for the reappearance of so many of the same characters so many years later?
The same explanation as to why Bob Shrum keeps running political campaigns: it's what they do. If a Democrat is elected President in 2008 and he (or she) appoints Bill Clinton to be Ambassador to the UN, will we all be shocked and complain about some left-wing conspiracy?
But really, are there really "so many" characters reappearing? The evidence just isn't there.
3. As a general issue, do you think the failure to thoroughly explore and expose contemporary scandals often leads to worse ramification later in time?
The strict answer to this is yes--failure to investigate scandals does lead to more of the same into the future.
But was Iran-Contra glossed over during the 1980s? Was it a mere footnote in history?
Have we been in bed with Iran since the Reagan administration and all of this Bush saber rattling is a mere front for the real position of the United States?
Is the United States itself responsible for the current Iranian nuclear research program? After all, we provided TOW missiles to them in the 80s.
Were the Sandanistas even Communists at all? Was opposing them related to the Cold War in any way?
Does John Poindexter's 9 month stint in the Bush 43 administration really tell us anything? Did Otto Reich ever do anything significant inside the current administration? The stretching here is pretty astounding.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.