Posted on 04/02/2015 2:32:12 AM PDT by Reaganite Republican
Since Grover Norquist favors open borders and amnesty for illegal immigrants, while Pat Buchanan spoke out against these things back when today's Johnny-come-latelies on the issue were calling him "racist" and "xenophobic" for it, I don't think that's entirely accurate.
“if Nixon can sit down and negotiate with a monster like Chairman Mao (who had the death of millions on his hands, and, indirectly in Vietnam, the death of tens of thousands of Americans) and Reagan can negotatiate with leaders of what he rightly called the Evil Empire, what is intrinsically treasonous about negotiating with Iran?”
______________________________________________________________
Mao needed a deal to defend against Soviets, couldn’t compete economically nor military on their own.
Gorbachev DESPERATELY needed a deal to save the USSR
But the Iranians don’t need us, any kind of arms control, nor Obama’s agreement... they’re used to the sanctions and seem to have adapted well enough. That’s why we are on our knees, BEGGING them, while they refuse to negotiate in good faith.
I would almost always talk to our enemies... just NOT NOW, current US leadership isn’t up to the task. Our side is simply parroting the Iranian position and attempting to stuff it down everybody else’s throats- the US effectively has NOBODY at the table!
Don’t want Obama striking the kind of weak, damaging, unenforceable, temporary 10-year agreement he’s attempting to do... entirely bypassing Congress, ignoring the pleas of our allies, etc.
That’s NOT how it’s supposed to be done in this country, plus Obama’s top adviser is an Iranian-born sympathizer who appears to hate American and all it stands for. Maybe that’s why everybody else already left.
WHY doesn’t any of that bother Pat Buchanan?
That just about covers it. I’ve never understood the Buchanan hatred among conservatives. William F. Buckley once wrote that Buchanan is more of a prophet than a politician, and if the country is to be saved, it will be along the lines laid down by Buchanan.
William F. Buckley resurrected or even invented the modern conservative movement by eliminating traditional Jew-haters from it. Buchanan’s Jew-hate used to be kept much more private.
I ask you simply, would Ronald Reagan be making excuses for Vladimir Putin?
David Gergan used to work for Reagan too. Information Director I believe. Don’t think much of him today. They all seem to go whacky in their old age.
I assume you have intimate knowledge of Buchanan’s private thoughts.
William F. Buckley did.
“Buchanan sounded delusional”
That may be. But your and Hannity’s neocon position makes leaps of faith too, especially in accepting “facts” and intel from the media or the Obama admin, here regarding Russia in Ukraine, and Iran’s ability to go nuclear.
I don’t think he’s saying we should blindly trust Iran.
Generally his points go back to what I said in #6.
My point: Trust no one, especially when it could mean putting this country in the middle of someone else’s un-winnable war.
Another point that suggests, contrary to defenders of Buchanan’s philosopy are excerpts in 1987:
In 1987, Buchanan called for ending prosecution of Nazi camp guards, saying it was “running down 70-year-old camp guards.”[155]
Buchanan asserted that six men accused of Nazi-era war crimes were innocent, or had not received proper legal treatment: John Demjanjuk, Karl Linnas, Arthur Rudolph, Frank Walus, Ivan Stebelsky, Tscherim Soobzokov.[8] Ukrainian born Demjanjuk, a retired Cleveland autoworker accused of operating the Treblinka concentration camp’s gas chambers, received the most attention. Buchanan called his trial a witch hunt and said “Demjanjuk had never even been at Treblinka.”[8] After a highly publicised trial, Demjanjuk was convicted and sentenced to death by an Israeli court, but his conviction was later overturned by the Supreme Court of Israel on the grounds of mistaken identity. Buchanan wrote at the time that this spared Israel the disgrace of hanging an innocent man.[8]
In a 1990 column defending Demjanjuk, Buchanan also said:
Diesel engines do not emit enough carbon monoxide to kill anybody. In 1988, 97 kids, trapped 400 feet (120 m) underground in a Washington, DC, tunnel while two locomotives spewed diesel exhaust into the car, emerged unharmed after 45 minutes. Demjanjuk’s weapon of mass murder cannot kill.[156]
When asked for his source, Buchanan said, “somebody sent it to me.” Critic Jamie McCarthy says this claim may have come from the German American Information and Education Association’s newsletter, a publication he accused of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial. He also argues that:
Unlike the locomotive engineer in Buchanan’s example, who was concerned with saving the lives of trapped people, the Nazis had no qualms about opening the engine’s throttle and restricting the air intake.[157]
The Washington Post reported in 1989, before the controversy, that:
An Amtrak train had been stalled in a tunnel for half an hour, and smoke from the diesel engine had filled the first car, where there were 97 fifth-grade pupils and 27 adult chaperones. [EMT Cynthia] Brown boarded the train, guided the passengers — most of whom suffered from smoke inhalation — from the car and assisted those who needed immediate attention.[158]
In an April 14, 2009, column, Buchanan likened the persecution of Demjanjuk to that of Jesus Christ on Calvary Hill, stating:
It is the same Satanic brew of hate and revenge that drove another innocent Man up Calvary that first Good Friday 2,000 years ago.[159]
Supported Nazis and Putin? or the 3rd Holy Roman Empire (3rd Reich) and Russian Empire (Eastern Orthodox Empire)? Read Alexander Dugin’s Book - “The Fourth Political Theory” and the deep seated motivations of Putin, Mao, Stalin and all totalitarians’ motivations..
I just made a post on another thread about what Buckley thought about Buchanan. It may have been in the famous essay everyone quotes. Buckley wrote: “Buchanan is more of a prophet than a politician, and if the country is to be saved, it will be along the lines laid down by Buchanan.” That quote is from memory, but is probably 90% accurate. Joseph Sobran critized Buckley about the anti-Semitism thing; Buckley fired him, but they later got together and reconciled. I’ve always been a Buckley fan, and I kept up with him.
Good point
Here’s another Buckley quote, “I find it impossible to defend Pat Buchanan against the charge that what he did and said during the period under examination amounted to anti-Semitism, whatever it was that drove him to say and do it.”
Reagan wouldn’t have had to make excuses for V. Putin because Reagan wouldn’t have let the relationship with Russia deteriorate to the point where the United States was backing the violent overthrow of a democratically elected European leader.
I’m not sure which Planet Pat lives on.
He switches so often you almost think its Medication related.
Totally clueless on Israel
“...Washington Senators and the Harlem Globetrotters...
Nice Freudian slip there. While I agree that the Washington Senators were only nominally a “real” major-league baseball team throughout most of their existence...I think you meant the Washington Generals.”
Aye. I thought old-timers disease, at first. But now I must agree with you. Freudian.
At least the Generals score points now and then.
He is senile.
I guess you forgot that there's an embargo on trade with Iran, and that the Iranian economy needs us more than we need anything from them. Also, the notion that Iran is some kind of existential threat to the US, or that the possibility of them having nukes is so much worse than the reality of Pakistanis having nukes is laughable.
When Gorbachev sent troops to crush a pro-independence uprising in Lithuania in early 1991, I don't remember George Bush (who inherited much of Reagan's foreign policy team) threaten an embargo, demand that we arm the uprising, or agitate for war. I doubt that Reagan would have either.
You seem to insist that John McCain and his girlfriend Lindsey Graham have inherited Reagan's foreign policy mantle. Reagan (along with Eagleburger, Weinberger, Baker) was much more of a realist than that. From the hysterics of McCain and the neoconservatives, you'd think that the eastern Ukraine is America's 51st state. It isn't. If the US had a territorial dispute/border skirmish with Mexico, somehow I doubt most people in Russia or China would care very much.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.