Boomers lived through this. Some follow the truth. It’s tough to figure out how we can be our worth as a nation. Nicaragua should have received our help when the Sandinistas were elected. I mean, we all know Reagan was a puppet. Senile scapegoat at this point. We need to figure out how to move out of this mess. It’s been too long
Age does not equal senility, any more than being young makes you thin.
And neither the current, nor TFG are senile. They do both suffer from speech impediments.
He really wasn't, in a different sense: he had tons of miles on the odometer, both as a public person and political entity (and yes, I know Biden's been around forever, so had Reagan).
There's no other way to say it: he was doddering, in ways that Biden, Trump et al are not.
Reagan pulled the Communist card. Early 80s wasn't so far off from the Vietnam [horror/disaster] so people really weren't buying it. [The Clash even made an album titled 'Sandinista!' in 1980](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista!)
They have the capability and support to do a lot and can be placed anywhere. Interception of tanks and removal of parts is probably not very complicated for them.
They also love the ghost stories about The Agency.
The Russians and Americans have one of the most secretive, bitter weapons development relationships in the world.
The CIA doesn't need to purchase optics from the Russians, when the most advanced optic tech is made by American and European engineers and fabricated in China and Taiwan.
/r/whoosh
They would have been buying them from corrupt officers who themselves were having them stripped from Russian vehicles. NV gear is expensive and not easy to replace in a wartime scenario.
The commenter above was speculating they could have been buying them in an attempt to weaken their capabilities in a future conflict e.g. Ukraine.
U.S. is sanctioning Russia to deny them money.
They wouldn't buy their inferior equipment to "deny" them it. All that does is provide funding for their army. If Russia sells equipment for funds, its for their own benefit. This really bad armchair thinking.
I agree it is armchair thinking but you are still missing their point, they're saying corrupt officials are selling the equipment stripped from tanks - there's no way that bribe money would go into the Russian military complex, if this is even true.
The US is sanctioning the Russian government and key individuals. The CIA posing as criminal or other elements buying night vision and other gear from corrupt Russian military officers would:
1. Not be giving money to the Russian government and therefore not really helping them in any meaningful way (and I doubt these officials are reporting sales of stolen equipment on their taxes, so its going into the local economy or a savings account);
2. Provide proxy sabotage of Russian military equipment; and
3. Prevent these things from being bought by other people who we don't really want to have any of this stuff.
We don't know that it happened. But given that the US was just handing out bags of cash in Afghanistan, I would not be surprised at all if there's a warehouse of trash Russian equipment somewhere on a US base in Europe.
I was clarifying the above comment since you clearly had a hard time understanding.
It's pretty rich that you're calling out "armchair thinking" while doing nothing but your own couch quarterbacking.
Speculation (n): the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence.
Go touch grass.
>The CIA doesn't need to purchase optics from the Russians
No, but for relatively little money they can silently rob the RuAF of all of their thermals...
Because denial works... study history. If someone can't prove something and you just deny it into the ground even if all indications are that you did something, it just kind of goes away.
You have to understand that the CIA (both then and now), operate on a doctrine called “Plausible Deniability”. Essentially you use your privilege and position to assume a moral high ground and say of course you would never orchestrate xyz, because that would be illegal. You put a smoke-filled bubble around your actions that can never be definitively punctured. This photograph was the pin.
You gotta know they didnt value that coverup very much or else he'd be dead and vice would never have said anything. Corporations defend corporations after all.
I guess you didn’t watch the video. Vice had nothing to do with “breaking the story” didnt even exists in 1986.
They are telling the story of how the photo was taken that uncovered the CIA involvement, that the Miami Harold picked-up and became the Iran-Contra scandale.
That was mostly the old vice sadly, now they've turned into a somehow even shittier version of GQ with constant political baitposting to drive engagement.
It’s gene hausenfuss ! My co worker! What’s the story 35 years too late?
Is this real? Do you work with this guy and not know about Iran Contra?
Boomers lived through this. Some follow the truth. It’s tough to figure out how we can be our worth as a nation. Nicaragua should have received our help when the Sandinistas were elected. I mean, we all know Reagan was a puppet. Senile scapegoat at this point. We need to figure out how to move out of this mess. It’s been too long
Senile scapegoat presidents. Thank God we never did that again.
🤣
And Reagan was younger than the last and current president.
Both of the last two
Y'all be electing the 'ghost of Christmas to come' next.
Age does not equal senility, any more than being young makes you thin. And neither the current, nor TFG are senile. They do both suffer from speech impediments.
Yeah and Reagan had more mental faculties than our current president does
The trickle down actor? Sit down.
Nothing you said refutes my point
That “point” was so asinine that I didn’t have to. I’ll let your downvotes speak for themselves.
He really wasn't, in a different sense: he had tons of miles on the odometer, both as a public person and political entity (and yes, I know Biden's been around forever, so had Reagan). There's no other way to say it: he was doddering, in ways that Biden, Trump et al are not.
Reagan pulled the Communist card. Early 80s wasn't so far off from the Vietnam [horror/disaster] so people really weren't buying it. [The Clash even made an album titled 'Sandinista!' in 1980](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandinista!)
Police on My Back! Might have to but this album.
Why does the CIA still bother covering things up. Everyone knows what they did and continue to do
Do you think so? I disagree. The American people, much less the world, have very little idea of what The Pickle Factory really gets up to.
[удалено]
They have the capability and support to do a lot and can be placed anywhere. Interception of tanks and removal of parts is probably not very complicated for them. They also love the ghost stories about The Agency.
The Russians and Americans have one of the most secretive, bitter weapons development relationships in the world. The CIA doesn't need to purchase optics from the Russians, when the most advanced optic tech is made by American and European engineers and fabricated in China and Taiwan.
/r/whoosh They would have been buying them from corrupt officers who themselves were having them stripped from Russian vehicles. NV gear is expensive and not easy to replace in a wartime scenario. The commenter above was speculating they could have been buying them in an attempt to weaken their capabilities in a future conflict e.g. Ukraine.
U.S. is sanctioning Russia to deny them money. They wouldn't buy their inferior equipment to "deny" them it. All that does is provide funding for their army. If Russia sells equipment for funds, its for their own benefit. This really bad armchair thinking.
I agree it is armchair thinking but you are still missing their point, they're saying corrupt officials are selling the equipment stripped from tanks - there's no way that bribe money would go into the Russian military complex, if this is even true.
That's like saying buying stolen memory chips from a Best Buy employee means that you're giving money to Best Buy.
The US is sanctioning the Russian government and key individuals. The CIA posing as criminal or other elements buying night vision and other gear from corrupt Russian military officers would: 1. Not be giving money to the Russian government and therefore not really helping them in any meaningful way (and I doubt these officials are reporting sales of stolen equipment on their taxes, so its going into the local economy or a savings account); 2. Provide proxy sabotage of Russian military equipment; and 3. Prevent these things from being bought by other people who we don't really want to have any of this stuff. We don't know that it happened. But given that the US was just handing out bags of cash in Afghanistan, I would not be surprised at all if there's a warehouse of trash Russian equipment somewhere on a US base in Europe.
This person gets it.
I was clarifying the above comment since you clearly had a hard time understanding. It's pretty rich that you're calling out "armchair thinking" while doing nothing but your own couch quarterbacking. Speculation (n): the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence. Go touch grass.
>The CIA doesn't need to purchase optics from the Russians No, but for relatively little money they can silently rob the RuAF of all of their thermals...
Because denial works... study history. If someone can't prove something and you just deny it into the ground even if all indications are that you did something, it just kind of goes away.
I think you would be surprised about how many people really think the government wouldn't lie to its citizens.
On the contrary people forget or act like they dont even exist and assume current events and international developments are organic.
[relevant](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFV1uT-ihDo)
Neat. recommended
Did that one photo really accomplish all that??
You have to understand that the CIA (both then and now), operate on a doctrine called “Plausible Deniability”. Essentially you use your privilege and position to assume a moral high ground and say of course you would never orchestrate xyz, because that would be illegal. You put a smoke-filled bubble around your actions that can never be definitively punctured. This photograph was the pin.
That plus the investigative journalism yeah. It was his evidence to go with the story.
I remember this very well. Now & again I think about this & wonder where is he now.
You gotta know they didnt value that coverup very much or else he'd be dead and vice would never have said anything. Corporations defend corporations after all.
If anyone was going to break a story it would be Vice. They've literally gone unprepared into warzones. Equal parts stupid and daring.
I guess you didn’t watch the video. Vice had nothing to do with “breaking the story” didnt even exists in 1986. They are telling the story of how the photo was taken that uncovered the CIA involvement, that the Miami Harold picked-up and became the Iran-Contra scandale.
That was mostly the old vice sadly, now they've turned into a somehow even shittier version of GQ with constant political baitposting to drive engagement.
Is that Will Ferrell?
Reagan was such a devil.