Fighting For Your Future: The Presidency of Walter Mondale

Preamble
  • Mondale Fighting For Your Future.jpg

    PREAMBLE
    I’ve always loved the 1980s. I know it’s cliché nowadays, because pretty much everyone does, but to me, it just oozes cool. Everything from the music, to the films, the cars, the bad outfits and bad hairstyles, the political dynamics of the time, the intrigue of the Cold War, the awful tragedy of the AIDS virus, the big personalities and big achievements of leaders at the time (Reagan, Thatcher, Hawke, Gorbachev etc) and so much more. There was so much triumph and tragedy wrapped up in a single decade and it bookended so many important events like The Cold War.

    Looking back, it just felt like a special time and important decade in the development of the world. And Reaganism was such a big part of that.

    In my opinion, the 1980s, was like Reagan's Presidency, cinematic in nature.

    But Reagan himself was a deeply complicated man, and his legacy is deeply complicated. Generally when people think of a Democratic 1980s, they have to remove Reagan entirely. Either Carter beats him in 1980, or Ford is re-elected in 1976.

    But what if Reagan comes into office, the actor President who promised fundamental change in the America, and then fails to win re-election? What if Walter Mondale, the decent but doomed liberal candidate from out timeline, defeats him?

    The kernels of that Reagan Revolution are still there, that famous inaugural address and landslide victory which showed a demand for change – but now, Mondale picks up the baton in 1984 and runs with it.

    I make no secret that two of my biggest pieces of inspiration for writing this timeline are timeslines found in this website. The first is Patton in Korea/MacArthur in the White House, which proved to me how great narrative, chapter-based storytelling could be in an alternate history scenario, and how it didn’t necessarily have to be a novel in length to be compelling.

    The other, of course, is McGoverning – a great, longer form style narrative which takes a deep dive into what a McGovern upset would truly be like. This, in many ways, is my own tribute to that – a feel good story about the victory of a fundamentally decent, doomed candidate in our world who ran on honestly, only to lose to sketchy, right wing demagogue because he told the people what they wanted to hear at the time.

    Sound familiar?

    And in a similar twist, Nixon and Reagan, the two victorious demagogues, were damaged by scandal in their second term which told us more about the sort of administrations they truly ran.

    McGovern and Mondale, for as different as they were, share a popular place in history: doomed idealists who seem predetermined to lose based on the popular perception of events as we know them. But for a shining moment, victory seemed within grasp for their true believers.

    Well, consider this timeline a tribute to those true believers, and to the late, great Walter Mondale – the greatest and most influential Vice President in American history, and a man who stood for what was right, even when it was not popular.
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter 1
  • CHAPTER 1:​

    “More than anything else, I want my candidacy to unify our country, to renew the American spirit and sense of purpose. I want to carry our message to every American, regardless of party affiliation, who is a member of this community of shared values.”

    -- Ronald Reagan’s speech at the 1980 Republican National Convention​

    Every breath hurt. Each gasp, worse than the one before it. What was worse, no matter how much air he tried to breath in, it never felt like enough. So that meant another breath in, and another bout of sharp pain in his ribs.

    He joked to those around him that he felt fine but in truth, every move he made hurt. Lights hurt to look at, so tinted shades covered his eyes. His sleep, when he could sleep, was interrupted by the ever-present agony that tormented his waking life, pulling him back into consciousness.

    The beating, and the message that went with it, gave a clear order: Go away, and stay away.

    The Nicaraguan soldiers of the Somoza regime had said as much: “Go home, dog. Tell the rest of the scum what happened to you”.

    The vicious beating that he and his interpreter endured served was to serve as a warning any journalist who came to Nicaragua would suffer the same fate, given the perception of foreign journalists as "part of the vast network of communist propaganda".

    When they returned to the United States on a plane chartered by his employer, ABC News, the world saw what had happened to them. It was recorded by a cameraman inside of the van they were operating out of.

    His interviews with his fellow journalists only served to further fuel the anger of the American public, aimed squarely at Somoza regime.

    His President, Jimmy Carter, personally met with him and expressed his condolences over the torment inflicted upon him and awarded he and crew medals for their bravery.

    He described the violence as “an act of barbarism that all civilized people condemn” and withdrew US support from the Somoza regime.

    A month later, Somoza fled Nicaragua and the Sandinistas took control shortly thereafter.

    Denied asylum in the US, Somoza settled in Paraguay, where he was assassinated by Sandinista agents in 1980.

    The event brought Bill Stewart no joy or closure.

    Despite the senseless violence of what occurred, he felt his business in Nicaragua was not yet finished. All the fame, respect, and attention afforded to him as a recognisable figure meant very little.

    He was a nationally and internationally renowned figure, but that he was known for being a victim – and that was not why he went to Nicaragua. He went to break a story, to be a journalist, to live his dream.

    If he was to reclaim himself, he needed to be known as something other than the guy who filmed getting his ribs caved in by Somoza’s storm trooper.

    A few months after Somoza’s death, he made up his mind knew - he would return to the site of his defining moment and find some way to move beyond the violent act done to him.

    Nicaragua was not done with Bill Stewart, and nor was he done with it.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.”

    It was those words in Reagan’s inaugural address that had set Walter Mondale on the path to run for President in 1984.

    Mondale was a political disciple of Hubert Humphrey, and had seen firsthand the positive, transformative power of government when President Franklin Roosevelt had lifted his community, alongside so many others, out of the Great Depression with his New Deal agenda.

    The beliefs he gained in childhood still shaped him to this day, and he was not about to let anyone – even the 40th President of the United States, trample on them.

    For now, he had to sit, smile for the camera, and accommodate Reagan as part of the peaceful transition of power. But in 1984, he knew he would have a chance to respond.

    However, Mondale had to be realistic. He, and the great President he had served under, had lost a landslide election. Reagan had won 44 states, and in a 3-way contest, attained a popular vote margin of 9.7%. A sober look at the facts told Mondale one thing – Jimmy Carter’s administration was not popular.

    So he would approach the next for years carefully, and use them constructively – he would teach at a university in Minnesota, examine issues at his own pace without the pressures of day-to-day crisis management, read extensively, and speak to people from outside the Washington bubble to get a fresh perspective.

    He would be a whole new Mondale, refreshed intellectually and spiritually, and he would take his time in building up the right staff, and coalition, to sweep Reagan out of office. Because in the end, Reagan was, as his mentor Hubert Humphrey once said was “just George Wallace sprinkled with eau de cologne”.

    Remembering that line made Mondale crack his first genuine smile of that day.

    Something else brightened that chilly January 20th day. The thought of 1984.

    Mondale knew the liberalism he stood for, the ideals of good governance and caring for ones’ fellow man, would propel him to the White House. And in 4 years’ time, it would be him delivering an inaugural address from the State Capitol.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 30th, 1981, President Ronald Reagan strode out of the Washington Hilton Hotel, following a speaking engagement with members of the AFL-CIO.

    He was still riding high in the glow of a massive landslide victory the previous November.

    America’s newly elected 40th President had brought with him several new Republican faces to the House and Senate, and with any luck, they would soon pass a bill that would substantially lower taxes, stimulate the economy and end Carter’s recession.

    Reagan, ever the optimist, looked at the next four years as being full of endless possibility. He was determined to give to the world the America he had inside him – the shining city on a hill.

    Little did he know, however, that a figure skulking in the crowd that afternoon was moments away from putting an end to all that promise.

    John Hinckley Jr stood in wait. This would be the ultimate expression of his love. He knew he might die, but it didn’t matter – Jodie Foster meant too much to him. He would do this, and she would see him as an equal, and she would have to love him.

    Reagan approached now. Hinckley was about to have his chance, with Reagan right in front of him.

    Hinckley assumed a crouch position and attempted to draw his Röhm RG-14 revolver.

    However, his nervous meant that his motion to draw the weapon was clumsy.

    Rather than smoothly draw his weapon, he awkwardly tried to pull the weapon from his pocket, initially getting it caught on the fabric, then forcibly jerking it out.

    This motion caused him to drop the weapon onto the ground, resulting in it going off and a bullet hitting Washington DC police officer, Thomas Delahanty, in his left shin.

    A nearby labor union official, Alfred Antenucci, saw Hinckley’s fumbled assassination attempt and tacked him to the ground, before landing several punches to the back of his head,

    The moment the gun went off, Reagan was shoved into his limousine by Secret Service Agent Jerry Parr, who dove on top of the President to protect him. As he did so, a sea of police and Secret Service agents converged on Hinckley.

    Parr inspected Reagan, who was unhurt except for bumping his head as he was shoved into the limousine. They returned to the White House, and he made a brief statement thanking “the brave DC police and Secret Service members who may well have saved my life” and brought particular attention to “Officer Tom Delahanty, who was wounded in the line of duty”.

    Reagan took his survival as a sign from the heavens that things were looking up for America – there would no national shock from the death of a President, no “what if?” as to his legacy, and no period of national mourning. Nancy was, of course, frightened by the incident but relieved that her husband was unhurt.

    The attempt of the President’s life caused his approval rating to jump slightly, then subside to previous numbers shortly thereafter.

    The failed attempt on Reagan’s life by a man obsessed with Jodie Foster would ultimately prove to be an odd curiosity, rather than a defining event of Reagan’s first term.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Joseph Crane rubbed his eyes. He took in a long drag of the cigarette in his hand.

    I should’ve just not showed up and taken the ban, he thought to himself. Better than working himself half the death so Ronnie Reagan could look like the tough cowboy he played in movies.

    The irony was not lost on him – PATCO had supported Reagan in his election against Jimmy Carter.

    He recalled the arguments amongst the boys.

    “He’s a former union man!”

    “Carter is a sissy. Reagan will whip the Russians.”

    “He’s for us. Remember that letter he sent to Robert Poli?”

    Hell, after a while Crane himself started to believe it. Maybe Reagan was the shining hero, right out of a movie coming to save America and help out the members of the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization.

    What a lie that was. President Reagan had strung the whole of PATCO along, then left them out to dry the moment negotiations got tough.

    The bosses organized a sickout, and Reagan had responded with an ultimatum – come to work, or lose your job.

    Well, Joe had come to work. Most of his buddies hadn’t.

    And now he and the other poor saps who showed up were dumped with extra work while the White House rushed around trying to find non-union replacements or Air Force guys to pick up the slack. They were overworked, understaffed, and demoralized. Not a great combination, Joe thought.

    He didn’t so much sip his coffee as chug down what was left of the cup.

    He and his fellow air traffic controllers were in for a long night.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    America woke on the morning of August 9th, 1981, to news of a horrible accident.

    A commercial airliner, a Boeing 747 flying from Japan to New York City, crashed into the World Trade Center, in the Financial District of Lower Manhattan.

    The tragedy occurred at around 3:30 AM in the morning, and as such, the only people present in the tower were cleaning staff.

    The event could have been much worse, but for the fact that the plane was at the end of a long journey and had spent half an hour circling JFK, waiting for permission to land.

    This had meant the fuel tank was relatively low when the plane made contact and lessened the size of the blaze that occurred when flaming jet fuel meant flammable office furniture and whatever paper materials were left around the office.

    Firefighters rushed to the scene, and spent hours putting out the inferno and rescuing anyone trapped inside.

    In total, 285 people, making up passengers and crew, were killed, along with 11 others in or around the Tower when it was struck by the Boeing 747. Three firefighters would lose their lives in the line of duty responding to the disaster.

    While the economic, social, and political fallout would only be evident later, the outpouring of grief at the loss of life in this terrible accident was immediately apparent.

    The World Trade Center was a cultural icon, a symbol of not just New York, but Americana itself, and an international tourist destination and symbol of the financial might of the United States.

    To see it damaged as it had been sent a shudder through the national psyche of the United States – for Ronald Reagan, whose whole presidency was predicated on restoring America’s sense of pride in itself, this was a great blow indeed.

    ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

    To say that the Reagan White House panicked in response to what was being called the World Trade Center 747 Accident was something of an understatement.

    Reagan called an emergency cabinet meeting to address both the federal response to this tragedy, and the political and public relations response to the controversy that was sure to come from it.

    As the Cabinet bickered, debated, deflected, and suggested, Reagan sat silently and stared around the room, as though looking for someone to save him from the predicament he now found himself him in.

    He had played hardball with the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization, firing more than 10,000 air traffic controllers, and only a few days later the United States had its worst aviation disaster in the history of the nation.

    The two men, alongside Reagan, who were sure to receive the most political heat were Secretary of Transportation, Drew Lewis, and Attorney General William French Smith.

    Both men were present at the press conference were Reagan issues his ultimatum and both were seen as key players in the President’s controversial decision to fire the striking PATCO workers who did not comply with his demand.

    “Mr President,” Lewis said, “If we back flip on this, we’re dead in the water. You laid down the law and were clear as can be – the strike was illegal, and the strikers broke the law and must be punished. Your word is final. Hire these people again and everyone from Tip O’Neil to Leonid Brezhnev will think your words mean nothing.”

    “We’re going to get blamed for this. No two ways about it.”, interjected Edwin Meese, a mainstay of Reagan’s political circle since his days as California Governor, and current Counselor to the President.

    James Baker, the President’s Chief of Staff, sought to get to the heart of the matter and turned directly to the Reagan.

    “Mr President, now’s the time for you to be seen as a leader during a national tragedy. If the Democrats or anyone else tries to pin this on you, then they’re just trying to use a terrible accident for partisan mudslinging. We’ll prepare a speech for you to give in the Oval Office.”

    The art of public performance. That was something Reagan knew he could do. The clear directive for Reagan to do what he did best – appeal to the nation through public address – focused and calmed the President.

    “Well, I can certainly do that.”, the President responded, with a wry, nervous smile.

    ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

    “My fellow Americans, events that transpired this morning in Lower Manhattan have shaken the city of New York, and this nation, to the core.

    Nancy and I share the grief felt by millions of you at home, as we watched alongside so many of you, the footage of that plane hitting The World Trade Center. Others heard the reports over the radio or got a call from a frightened neighbor.

    However any of us received the news, one thing is certain – we are all bound together by our grief and by our sympathy for the lives lost and the families impacted by this terrible occurrence.

    Experts tell us that this is the worst aviation disaster in American history, and almost 300 people have lost their lives. But these are not just statistics, and each life lost has a story behind it – a family that will mourn them, friends who will cherish their memory, the dreams, and the people they’ve left behind – this is a true measurement of this unspeakable tragedy that has befallen this nation.

    To those who have lost friends and loved ones – we cannot bare as you do, the full burden of such an inconceivable loss. But we feel your pain, and you are in our thoughts and our prayers.

    There will be an investigation, to be sure. This White House will do all it can to get to the bottom of this tragic event and do our utmost to make sure it never happens again. While do not know the exact cause of today's events, we do know one thing for sure – our first priority is, and must be, the safety of the American people. It is for this reason that as President, I am ordering a 24 hour halt to air traffic in American airspace, with the exception military, police, and medical flights.

    Our administration is in close contact with state and local officials in New York, and we’re working tirelessly to get the city back on its feet.

    In times of national tragedy, we as a nation have always found a way to come together and remember those we have lost, determined to forge a new path dedicated to their memory, together.

    For almost a decade, the World Trade Center has stood as a symbol of ingenuity and accomplishment – towering pillars of excellence that stand watch over a dynamic and vibrant sprawl, so renowned for excitement they called it “The City That Never Sleeps”. Today those proud pillars were damaged, but they can and will be rebuilt, stronger than ever.

    And perhaps we’ve forgotten that the ideals the World Trade Center represents are stronger than steel and concrete. For it is called the World Trade Center – not the American Trade Center. We know that there are millions more people across the globe who mourn with us.”

    The speech was classic Reagan, soaring rhetoric, dripping with American exceptionalism, designed to bring the nation together and preempt any efforts by Democrats to blame Reagan’s decisions as being a contributing factor in the crash.

    While Reagan sought to console and calm the nation with a resonant speech, his cabinet secretaries were tasked with handling the more practical matters of addressing the crisis.

    Members of the Reagan administration were in close contact with New York Governor, Hugh Carey, and the Mayor of New York City, Ed Koch.

    The effect on New York City, an area that had already become synonymous with urban decay and the “malaise” of the 1970s, was profound.

    Mass transit in and around The World Trade Center were completely shut down minutes after the plane hit the tower and would resume days later.

    Many financial institutions based in Lower Manhattan were closed on the day of August 9th. Most were operating as normal by the 12th.

    The South Tower would be closed for repairs for months, while the rest of The World Trade Center would resume regular activities in the days and weeks following the accident.

    Hundreds of already struggling small businesses were crippled by the events of August 9th, and the subsequent disruptions that continued thereafter. As a result, thousands of jobs were lost.

    For a city already saddled by economic woes, high rates of crime and racial tension, this was yet another misfortune.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the days, weeks and months following the World Trade Center 747 Accident, a congressional investigation was launched, and countless media exposes were released to the public.

    Whistle-blowers inside the aviation industry spoke of the conditions they were put under, following the mass firing of 11,345 striking air traffic controllers. They were forced to work long shifts, with fewer breaks and in workplaces with critically low morale.

    The United States Senate Select Committee to Study The World Trade Center Aviation Accident, better known as the Packwood Committee, made a finding that the conditions which led to the fatal accident “were the result of human error, and abetted by critically low manpower and improper workplace practices among those responsible for air traffic control”.

    This made Reagan’s decision to fire them over the labor dispute incredibly divisive. On one hand, his detractors stated that Reagan’s harsh decision had created the conditions that allowed for the incident to happen.

    Inversely, those who supported Reagan, claimed that his detractors were politicizing a tragedy and the fault rests with the individual air traffic controller and pilots whose errors caused the crash. They also blamed the union for being unreasonable, breaking the law, and forcing Reagan’s hand.

    Thus began the first truly divisive flashpoint in Reagan’s presidency – his decision to break the PATCO strike and fire the striking workers.

    In the aftermath of the event, Reagan’s approval rating briefly went up a few points, then as more information was released to the public about the causes behind the crash, his approval rating sunk to 44% by October of 1981. This was no doubt enhanced by the continuing recession that plagued the US and much of the world.

    However, perhaps the biggest impact of the day of August 9th was on the national psyche – Ronald Reagan had campaigned on improving America’s shaken national confidence following the turbulent 1960s and 1970s. What began with the assassination of President Kennedy, through the Vietnam War, civil unrest, Watergate, the Oil Crisis, and Iran Hostage Crisis, had continued with the World Trade Center 474 Accident.

    It was the first sign that perhaps Reagan’s talk of American renewal in the 1980s was not all it was cracked up to be.

    Perhaps America’s hard luck was set to continue, after all.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    October of 1981 saw the passage of the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981.

    It was a bill primarily built on compromise between the Republican executive and Senate, and the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives.

    Senator Bob Dole was a central figure in the final version of the ERTA that was signed into law. It closed several tax loopholes, introduced stricter compliance and tax-collection measures, increased excise taxes on cigarettes and telephone services, and corporate taxes were not lowered to the extent Reagan and his fellow supply siders would have wanted.

    Reagan got his income tax cut through, however. Within 3 years, the top tax rate would be lowered from 70% to 50%, while the lowest would be reduced from 14% to 11%.

    Reagan signed the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 into law at Rancho del Cielo, his vacation home.

    Located on top the Santa Ynez Mountain range northwest of Santa Barbara, California, it would come to be known as the Western White House by the public and the media, given Reagan’s frequent visits while in office.

    In signing the legislation, Reagan called it “the culmination of months of tough negotiation between the White House and the Congress. I would like to give particular thanks for Senator Bob Dole of Kansas for his work in seeing the passage of this vitally important piece of legislation.”

    He went on to highlight how this tax bill was “the most sweeping overhaul of tax code in our nation's history… that encourages risk-taking, innovation, and that old American spirit of enterprise.”

    The passage of this legislation lifted Reagan’s approval rating, which sat around 46%, to 50%. His Presidency had been marred by the PATCO/World Trade Center controversy and partisan gridlock for much of his first year, but the passage of major legislation did much to redeem his first year, in his own eyes if nothing else.

    Despite touting it as a major success, behind the scenes, conservatives were frustrated at the number of concessions Reagan had accepted to get it passed. It was not the piece of legislation that Jack Kemp and William Roth envisioned.

    The anger of conservatives had to go somewhere, and in the end, it was directed at James Baker, Reagan’s chief of staff.

    Baker was a former Democrat and had endorsed George Bush in the Republican primary of 1980. His influence, particularly on domestic legislation, was considerable. He had facilitated much of the negotiations between the White House, the Senate, and the House, and encouraged Reagan to seek compromise where he could, to get the bill passed.

    Howard Phillips and Clymer Wright, two conservative activists and early Reagan backers, were central figures in galvanizing opposition to Baker, and encouraging Reagan to dismiss him. Baker, they argued, was undercutting the conservatives in both the White House and the Congress, and had to go. He was the reason for the President’s disappointing first year in office.

    Reagan had no intention of doing so, but the increased stress on Baker began to affect him. Weight gain, depression, and a lethargy soon followed.

    By early 1982, Baker was ready to leave.

    “Mr. President”, he said, “It’s been an honor working for you. But I just can’t do this anymore. I think it’s time for me to go into the private sector.”

    “I’m sorry to hear that, James.” Reagan replied.

    Baker knew he would never hear from Reagan again, unless Baker himself reached out.

    It was classic Reagan. For as gregarious and warm he seemed in public, in private, he was a deeply reserved person. This was especially true in political settings.

    In the words of his biographer, Lou Cannon, Reagan was “humanly accessible to people who had never met him and impenetrable to those who tried to know him well.”

    There was a barrier between Ronald Reagan and the rest of the world. For as much as foreign dignitaries and world leaders called him the most gregarious world leader they had ever met, his own staff found him oblivious to the needs their needs and almost completely passive in the face of any decision or hardship.

    He gave no orders, no instructions. He gave no emotional support to those around him. Long-time staff could go away for months at a time on sabbatical, and they would return unsure if Reagan had even noticed they were gone at all.

    It was not as if he was cruel or rude – quite the opposite, he was consistently polite to everyone in his circle – he simply kept an emotional distance between himself and everyone else around him that only Nancy could penetrate. And even then, only to a point.

    This did not bode well for the internal culture of the Reagan White House – aides competed for Reagan’s favor, not knowing they would never get it. Many young, Reagan staffers and even hardened political operates would destroy themselves trying to gain the acknowledgement of a leader who seemed unwilling, or unable, to give them that attention and affection.

    As a result, this created a White House with critically low morale at almost all times, and even the most capable aides who departed would soon write tell all memoirs about the inner workings of the Reagan White House – most of which, were not positive.

    Reagan’s detached passivity made his most central staffing appointments, such as the Chief of Staff, utterly central to his Presidency. They were the true power inside the White House, who moved it along, gave the orders and guided everything.

    It was any wonder that the job left Baker a burnt-out mess within a year. Reagan never scorned him, and even regretted the “campaign of harassment” directed at his departing Chief of Staff. But he never really thanked him – that was not Reagan’s way.

    As such, a major cabinet reshuffle was conducted in early 1982, with James Baker’s departure from the White House.

    Baker’s role of chief-of-staff would be carried out by Donald T. Regan, the incumbent Secretary of the Treasury. George Shultz was invited to return to government as Secretary of the Treasury, replacing Regan, which he accepted. Haig would remain as Secretary of State, in spite of his tensions with Caspar Weinberger, the incumbent Defense Secretary. Meanwhile, Reagan’s Secretary of Transportation, Drew Lewis, was quietly let go, and replaced by William Milliken, the long-time Republican Governor of Michigan.

    With any luck, this new team would produce better results for Reagan’s next year, compared with his turbulent first year. With mid-terms rapidly approaching, Reagan needed some major victories that conservatives could get behind.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Bill Stewart touched down in Nicaragua in January of 1982. He was unsure of how he might feel – nervous? Excited?

    In truth, he felt calm. Relaxed. This is where he was supposed to be.

    Here, he would build a new legacy for himself – one built on his journalistic talent, not his suffering.

    Many people within Nicaragua recognized him, and a representative of the Sandinista government met him at the airport in Managua when he landed.

    If he wanted a story, they told him, he could report on how much better life was for the people of Nicaragua now that the Sandinista government, led by Daniel Ortega, were in charge.

    Stewart politely declined – there was another aspect of Nicaragua he’d come to report on. Conflict had brought him to this troubled nation in the first place, so it was conflict he sought to return to.

    He had heard about a group of right-wing rebels conducting a campaign of guerrilla war throughout Nicaragua, in an attempt to overthrow the Sandinista government. This would be his story, nothing less would do.

    He smirked and asked the government representative one question.

    “What can you tell me about the Contras?”
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter 2
  • CHAPTER 2:​

    “It's a pity both sides can't lose.”

    -- Henry Kissinger commenting on the Iran-Iraq War​

    The Middle East had long served as a proxy battle ground for the West and Soviet bloc through much of the Cold War.

    Yet one of its bloodiest chapters yet was not the product of the two great powers jockeying for position – no, the root cause of this conflict would come about due to the struggle for resources, and sectarian and ethnic differences that gave rise to violence as one group chose to impose itself on another.

    In the Arab World, such conflicts were nothing new. But now, in the late 20th century, they would reach new levels of brutality. A brutality that mixed ancient animosities, outmoded tactics, and cutting-edge technology into a messy cacophony of violence that would leave thousands of men, women, and children dead or injured.

    Thus, Saddam set himself on a course for war. Border clashes with Iran had revealed what Saddam interpreted as post-revolutionary chaos and disorder. Iran was weak, and Saddam was prepared to strike.

    His reasons for beginning this conflict were twofold – firstly, he sought to secure the Khuzestan Province that was rich in oil, and the Shatt al-Arab waterway.

    The latter was a vitally important channel used in the export of oil through the Persian Gulf. It originally belonged to Iraq, but was seceded to Iran in 1975, in exchange for Iran’s promise to discontinue support for Kurdish guerrillas inside Iraq. The former would bolster Iraq’s supply of oil and be a boon to the Iraqi economy.

    His second reason for launching an attack was out of fear that Khomeini would export a fundamentalist Shia revolution to Iraq, as he previously called for Iraqis to overthrow the Ba'ath government.

    These reasons were enough for Saddam to void the 1975 Algiers Agreement, and commence an attack.

    On September 22nd, 1980, Saddam Hussein ordered the first strike in what would become known as the Iran-Iraq War.

    Taking inspiration from Israel’s victory in the Six Day War, Saddam ordered a strike to cripple Iran’s far superior air force.

    However, the Iraqi Airforce failed to take into account the hardened air bunkers used to protect Iranian planes, and as such, the attack failed to do any significant damage to Iran’s air force.

    What followed was a ground invasion of Khuzestan by Iraqi ground forces, which included mechanized and armored divisions.

    Port cities of Abadan and Khorramshah were quickly put to siege, and the traditional Tehran–Baghdad invasion route used by Iran was blocked by Iraqi forces after they secured territory near the city Qasr-e Shirin.

    The attack had caught Iran off guard, and allowed Iraq to capture a significant amount of territory in a short time.

    However, the following day, Iran mounted a major air offensive called Operation Kaman 99, which saw nearly 200 Iranian aircrafts attack Iraqi airports and air bases, to gain air superiority as quickly as possible.

    Operation Kaman 99 proved to be extremely effective, badly damaging Iraq’s air forces and ensuring Iranian air superiority by the end of 1980. Later studies would suggest that the effectiveness of Iraq’s ariel efficiency was cut down by as much as 55%.

    Still, while Iran had air superiority, through most of 1980 Iraq was able to conduct a slow, grueling advance into Iranian territory.

    This slow advance had allowed Iran to bolster their forces with thousands of new recruits, emboldened to fight in holy war against an invading enemy. Much to Saddam’s disappointment, his invasion only strengthened the shaky internal reputation of the Khomeini regime. Furthermore, Arabs inside Khuzestan remained loyal to Iran, when Saddam believed they would join his cause in fighting for Iraq and Arab superiority.

    While Iran’s military was severely weakened following purges of military commanders believed to be disloyal to the Revolution, they were far from the paper tiger Saddam expected.

    By 1981, the war had largely fallen into a brutal pattern of bloody stalemate.

    The tactics and overall ebb-and-flow of the war had established itself. It had become a conflict with modern weaponry, but tactics out of the First World War.

    Trenches were dug, and the ground between them became a barbed wire filled field of death, with mortar fire and a volley of bullets rushing to meet anyone who dared cross the gap. Soldiers manned fixed machine posts and conducted bayonet charges. And chemical weapons were used extensively by Iraq.

    While many saw misery and a terrible struggle ahead, one man saw opportunity – the President of Iran, Abolhasan Banisadr.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In his youth, Banisadr had actively participated in the anti-Shah student protests of the 1960s and had been imprisoned multiple times for his efforts. Rather than continue domestic rebellion inside Iran, he fought to oppose the Shah abroad.

    His journey took him to France, to become part of the entourage of Ruhollah Khomeini. Banisadr’s father had been an ayatollah, and close to Khomeini, so the decision was a natural one.

    been an early supporter of Khomeini, joining him when the populist cleric was exiled in France, and returning with him following the ousting of the Shah.

    He was a former Minister of Finance and Minister of Foreign Relations appointed by the Revolutionary Council, before becoming the first President of Iran.

    Despite his long history with Khomeini, Banisadr’s Presidency was far from secure. This was due in large part, due to his hostility toward the clergy and theocratic figures like Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Ali Khamenei.

    Banisadr believed that clerics should not assume positions of power inside government, such as ministerial roles, and that major reforms were necessary in Iran’s economy and military if it was to thrive.

    His demands were ignored, and his tense relationship with his own Prime Minister, Mohammad-Ali Rajai, only made things worse.

    Banisadr’s position as Iran’s President was precarious at best, and he needed drastic to affirm his legitimacy as a leader.

    The present conflict with Iraq offered such a chance.

    As commander-in-chief of Iran’s armed forces, Banisadr ordered a major offensive, entitled Operation Nasr.

    The brainchild of Banisadr, who was not a military leader, Operation Nasr was designed an armored offensive to drive Iraqi forces back, and relieve the city of Abadan, which had been under siege for several weeks.

    The attack was delayed a few days to build up necessary infantry support to ensure the tanks were adequately protected. But the success of the operation relied almost entirely on it being a complete surprise.

    In the days leading up to the operation, Iran launched a diversionary attack to distract Iraqi forces and leave them unprepared for the major offensive.

    Operation Nasr was the brainchild of a career politician, but Iraq’s own military forces had a similar issue.

    When it came to Iran’s enemy in the war, Saddam exercised total control of military strategy and would see anyone who disagreed with him executed. This created in inflexible, timid military command who were at the behest of someone with very little strategic or tactical knowledge.

    It was for that reason that Operation Nasr had any chance of succeeding at all – indeed, it was a poorly planned out operation that would have seen Iran’s tank forces bogged down in swampland and likely wiped out.

    But as fate would have it, this was not to be.

    With Iraq’s forces stretched thin and controlled by incompetent leadership, the 300 strong force of tanks, alongside infantry, advanced undetected and undeterred until it was too late for an effective Iraqi response.

    Thus, the armored thrust would successfully cross the Karkheh River, push past the cities of Susangerd and Ahvaz, and drive down the west bank of the Karun River.

    Forces inside Abadan broke out of their position and linked up with the armored column. Together, they pushed back Iraqi forces back from Abadan and toward the Iran-Iraq border.

    This turned Banisadr from a beleaguered political leader into a national hero overnight. Upon his return to Tehran, he was greeted by cheering crowds of thousands, and a parade through the street.

    A series of Iranian victories following Operation Nasr were attributed to Banisadr, despite his limited involvement in the planning process.

    As ‘the Liberator of Abadan’, Abolhasan Banisadr’s position as President of Iran was secure. But he would always have enemies plotting in the shadows, and Khomeini recognized that his popularity, and their differences, threatened the stability of a post-revolution Iran.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    “We will do everything in our power to prevent an Iranian victory in the Gulf. The expansionist character of the Khomeini regime makes them a threat to every other nation in the Mid-East, including our friends, Israel and Saudi Arabia. To that end, our administration has begun the effort to rearm and resupply Iran’s enemy in this conflict, Iraq. But we seek a peaceful negotiated end to the conflict for the good of all the people of the world. Iran and Iraq occupy a vital piece of geography, that contains much of the world’s oil supply. If it is compromised, it could throw the global economy into chaos. Put plainly, this in unacceptable. But, if the choice is between a victory for Iran and a victory for Iraq, we choose Iraq.“

    These were Reagan’s words in a special address to the American people from the oval office on June 9th, 1981.

    He was making his case the American people that Iraq should be removed from the State Department's list of State Sponsors of Terrorism, and that the US should send large amounts of dual use technology and equipment to aid in the country’s battle against Iran.

    Without foreign support, it was likely Iraq would eventually fall – their military forces were in disarray after a series of successful offensive actions by Iran, and the fact that Syria had closed the Kirkuk–Baniyas pipeline, stopping Iraqi oil from reaching tankers on the Mediterranean.

    Congress was largely supportive of Reagan’s suggestion, as Khomeini had made clear he intended to oust Saddam and put an Islamic Republic in his own image. Memories of the hostage crisis were still fresh in the minds of the public, so they too did not offer objections to aiding an enemy of Khomeini.

    Thus, there was very little domestic resistance to the White House’s efforts to bolder Iraq. Internationally, many nations began to aid Iraqi’s war effort, including the Soviet Union.

    The fact that the Soviets and Americans were both supplying Iraq led Reagan to quip that “ just about the only thing Leonid Brezhnev and I agree on is that Iran must be stopped.”

    And foreign military aid was desperately needed – since the success of Operation Nasr, Iran had won a series of victories that had pushed them into Iraqi territory. From there, the battles became brutal slogs as Iran slowly began grinding down the Iraqi army.

    The Iraqi strategy had changed from gaining Iranian territory to denying Iran any Iraqi land. Saddam had ordered a state of total war, as virtually every aspect of Iraqi society had become based on the war effort. A strategy of scorched Earth was used to ensure that Iran could not benefit materially from any Iraqi land they captured, and every man, woman and child was expected to do their part, on pain of death.

    This, combined with massive amounts of foreign aid from America, France, the Soviet Union, Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom, and elsewhere, slowly began to turn the tide.

    Through heavy artillery barrages and extensive use of chemical weapons, Iraq began to push back Iranian forces toward the border and by the final months of 1981, had successfully pushed Iranian forces out of Iraqi territory.

    This would have substantial implications for the internal politics of Iran, to say the least.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By December of 1981, Abolhassan Banisadr’s rivalry with the clergy had spilled over into many aspects of Iranian society, with different factions and groups taking sides.

    This rivalry was beginning to damage Iran’s performance in the war, and in domestic affairs. Not least of all to the competing loyalties of Iran’s armed forces and political wings.

    President Banisadr, as commander-in-chief of Iran’s armed forces, had the loyalty of Iran’s Army, Navy and Air Force.

    However, Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guard had far stronger ties to Khomeini and to the clerics, as their very purpose was to protect the Islamic character of the revolution itself.

    The general mistrust between Iran’s military wing and Revolutionary Guard meant that they did not coordinate or conduct joint operations, severely undercutting the effectiveness of the war effort.

    But perhaps even more damaging to the stability of the Iranian government was the political infighting between the President and the clergy.

    Banisadr argued for reform and for an advisory role for the clergy, while the clergy themselves argued his undercutting of the clerics had been a betrayal of Khomeini and the revolution.

    In essence, the conflict had become one of technocracy vs theocracy, and soon Khomeini would need to make his opinion known as to which would govern Iran.

    And despite his personal popularity as the Liberator of Abadan, Banisadr feared that Khomeini would soon oust him.

    To that end, he sought the cooperation of the armed forces in the event the Revolutionary Guard moved against him, which they promptly gave him.

    But Banisadr feared this would not be enough, so he reached out to Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), also known as the People's Mujahedin Organization of Iran.

    As a militant leftist group who had risen to be the largest domestic source of rebellion against Khomeini, their support would be essential if Banisadr was to require allies against Khomeini.

    However, recent months saw the Revolutionary Guard crackdown on MEK, raiding areas where they congregated, violently suppressing public demonstrations, and executing or imprisoning MEK members when they could be found.

    By December 11th, 1981, rumors of Banisadr’s discussions with MEK reached Khomeini, and this was all the Supreme Leader needed to impeach the President, as announced the very next day.

    The impeachment sent ripples through Iran and was watched closely by Iraq and the West.

    The Presidential suite was raided, but Banisadr could not be found - loyalists within the government had warned the ousted leader that his impeachment was coming and he promptly fled to Western Iran.

    Soon, infighting began between Iran’s military and Revolutionary Guard. Streets that had been largely untouched by the war with Iraq were now being drenched in blood from a civil war inside Iran.

    MEK soon joined in, fighting alongside pro-Banisadr members of Iran’s armed forces, conducting guerrilla raids and bombings of Revolutionary Guard military positions.

    Saddam was elated at the internal strife, and used the chaos from the Iranian Civil War to conduct a major offensive, breaking Iranian lines and advancing toward Khuzestan.

    Rather than allow Iraq to take the land, Khomeini ordered that the oil fields in the region be set on fire.

    This would slow the advance of the Iraqi army, as Saddam ordered a substantial force of men to combat the subsequent ecological disaster that occurred, to preserve the oil that would fuel Iraq’s rise to the dominant power in the Middle East.

    Images of the Khuzestan Oil Fires shocked the international community, and a picture of a lone man standing near the blaze behind a thin sheet of asbestos to act as a shield would capture the world’s attention for many months.

    A number of NGOs and religious groups offered to volunteer assistance, but given the current climate of violence, many in the international community forbade citizens from traveling to offer assistance, with the US being one of them.

    “Nancy and I share the grief and frustration felt my millions of Americans who pray for an end to the conflict in the Gulf and who want to see those horrible fires put out,” President Reagan said in a statement to the media, “But until the current war between Iran and Iraq is put to an end, it is simply not safe to send Americans into harm's way.

    The Khuzestan Oil Fires would take several months to put out, and would prove bitterly divisive for the already bitterly split Iranian public.

    However, it would prove to only slow down Iraq for a very limited time, and there was no way that pro-Khomeini forces could succeed in a two-front war.

    Difficult choices would soon need to be made, if Khomeini’s revolution would survive.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In March of 1982, Donald Rumsfeld touched down in Baghdad to represent the interests of the United States, as Reagan’s special envoy.

    With Saddam poised to become the dominant power in the Middle East, the White House sought to build better relations with the Iraqi strongman to ensure he could be a useful ally.

    In a cable back to the White House, Rumsfeld laid out the points discussed between himself and Saddam.

    This was relayed to Reagan in the situation room, surrounded by the staff of his National Security Council.

    “So, what’s the situation in Iraq?” Reagan asked.

    “Well, Mr President,” answered Secretary of State Alexander Haig, “Rumsfeld let Saddam know that it’s our position that his goals in fighting Iran have been accomplished and that we believe he should work on securing the land he has, rather than continued expansion.”

    “The Israelis won’t stand for Iraq gaining too much power. Saddam has made clear that he’s seeking nuclear weapons and the French are happy to build him a reactor”, interjected Vice President Bush.

    “Right.” Reagan responded, shifting awkwardly in his seat, “Is this going to cause us a headache?”

    “All the more reason to get Saddam on side, Mr President,” Haig answered, “Congress might have their own ideas, but we’ll lean on them to give the Iraqis as much leeway as possible. The situation in Khuzestan is going to get bloody before it all calms down.”

    The President gave a slight nod, as if to acknowledge everything Haig said and agree to the general course of events he suggested.

    “And what about Iran?”

    “The civil war there in ongoing,” Haig responded, briefly looking down at the file he had in front of him, “The two sides are split between Khomeini’s Revolutionary Guard and other loyalists, and President Banisadr, the military, and the pro-communist MEK group...”

    As usual, Haig dominated the meetings of the National Security Council, with his overbearing personality and background essentially running the White House during the troubled final years of the Nixon presidency.

    Few were willing to interject or take the initiative from Haig by this point. Or not since James Baker left the position of chief of staff to enter the private sector. Only Defense Secretary Weinberger would argue with him, but by now even he had been worn down by Haig’s imposing, relentless style.

    Bush might have had the knowledge and clout to contribute, but he and Reagan had never warmed to one another – aides thought this was likely due to the mutual animosity between the two men’s’ spouses. Thus, he, like most of Reagan's cabinet and staff, was kept on the outside and lacked familiarity or comfort to interject into meetings.

    As such, Haig was left to control US foreign policy almost by his lonesome, as Reagan took no initiative on himself and everyone else seemed subservient to the domineering Haig.

    “In short Mr President, our options are a rouge, expansionist Islamic Iran, or a Soviet aligned more moderate Iran. In my view, the latter is preferable. Khomeini is a wild card and at the very least, negotiating with the Soviets might give us some leverage over a Soviet-backed MEK Iran. They can be reasonable, Khomeini is a fanatic.”

    Reagan looked very unsure at the suggestion that a Soviet aligned Iran might be preferable to the current Khomeini government.

    “If nothing else, Mr President” interjected Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger, “our intel suggests that Banisadr opposed taking hostages in the US Embassy and opposes Khomeini’s expansionism. A neutered Banisadr government will be far easier to deal with.”

    That was enough to get Reagan on board.

    “All right,” Reagan responded, “Lets reach and see about supporting this rebel group”.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As 1982 dragged on, the pro-Banisadr forces found themselves a useful new ally – the CIA.

    American weapons meant for Iraq were being diverted by Israeli and other private arms dealers into the possession of MEK and other anti-Khomeini forces.

    This proved a boon to rebel forces, but would pale in comparison to what had come next.

    For the past several weeks, Saddam Hussein had worked to tighten his grip on the areas of Iran he now controlled – the Khuzestan Province and the eastern bank of the Shatt al-Arab river. He ordered his men to conduct mass killings of the local populace, and he deployed the usage of chemical weapons several times.

    Iranian helicopters air lifted foreign camera crews to document Saddam’s extensive use of chemical weapons, which made it impossible to hide from the international community. The usage of chemical weapons was viewed as a crime against humanity by the UN, but the US used their veto power to protect Iraq from any substantive resolutions.

    Thanks to in-fighting inside Iran, heavily weakened Iranian forces were wholly incapable of mounting any effective offense, which meant that the territory was now effectively Saddam’s.

    As such, with Iran in such a vulnerable state, Saddam sought to solidify his gains. He gave Ayatollah Khomeini an ultimatum – sue for peace and accept terms favorable to Iraq, or Saddam would march his army all the way to Tehran and beyond.

    There was no way Khomeini could continue to fight a two-front war, and, after several weeks of deliberation, he agreed to Saddam’s terms.

    Khuzestan Province and the eastern bank of the Shatt al-Arab river were now Saddam’s.

    This decision, especially in light of Khomeini’s action to set fire to the Khuzestan oil fields to stop Saddam, angered many Iranians who were previously sympathetic or neutral toward Khomeini.

    The combined might of the disgruntled Iranian citizenry, alongside Iran’s military, proved too much for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard.

    The situation was rapidly deteriorating, with many of Khomeini’s allies, such as Ali Khamenei and Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, were killed in MEK assassination plots or died at the hands of the military. His support was eroding and his loyalists were rapidly losing ground in the urban fighting.

    In the early hours of June 2nd, 1982, Khomeini attempted to flee Iran in a private aircraft. However, Iranian soldiers operating a ZU-23-2 anti-aircraft cannon saw the plane in the air and, assuming it to be Iraqi or an Islamic Revolutionary Guard aircraft, shot it down.

    It would be several days before Khomeini’s death would be confirmed.

    Despite all that had happened, Banisadr was devastated at learning Khomeini had been killed. Benisadr had been one of Khomeini’s favorite students and most loyal followers, and had been with the former Supreme Leader since his time exiled in France.

    Whatever differences the two men grew to have, and however else Khomeini had broken his promises regarding the revolution, he was still Banisadr’s hero from the time he was a teenager. This loss would hurt, for years to come.

    Fighting between the Iranian rebels and Islamic Revolutionary Guard would continue for months, most heavily in Tehran but elsewhere too. As time went by however, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard became less and less effective until only small pockets of resistance and low level guerrilla insurgency groups remained.

    It would be several weeks before Banisadr could return to Tehran and claim his place as the head of a new Iranian government, but he would do his utmost to see that this new revolution would be one of, by, and for the people of Iran.

    The Islamic Republic of Iran was gone. Now, the Democratic Republic of Iran would take its place.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Saddam Hussein surveyed the scene of his triumph.

    Flanked by a massive military guard, he looked over Khuzestan. Pillars and smoke still bellowed, the result of the ill-fated attempt to burn the area’s oil wells and stop the Iraqi military from advancing. The trenches that had been dug during the fighting still remained, and burnt out and destroyed mechanized vehicles littered the landscape, months after the fighting had concluded.

    For all the scars of war that covered the landscape, it was still the most beautiful thing Saddam Hussein had ever seen.

    Saddam knew that the struggle to hold and occupy his newly gained land would be long and difficult, but entirely worth it.

    Khuzestan and the Shatt al-Arab river. Both belonged to Saddam. He had conquered his enemy, Iran, and had seen its leader Khomeini, deposed, and replaced with a Soviet puppet.

    Soon, the French would help him complete the nuclear reactor that would give him his ultimate weapons. He would enact revenge on Israel, another enemy, and he would be the untouched, ultimate power in the Middle East. The Kurds too would soon feel the renewed wrath of Saddam’s growing empire.

    Tonight, he would partake in an increasingly common habit for him – Mateus rosé. It was the drink he treated himself to in victory, and he would relish it greatly.

    For Saddam, the future was his to command.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the United States, the final climactic months of the Iran-Iraq War had a considerable impact on both the economy and on foreign policy.

    The Khuzestan Oil Fires badly damaged the supply of oil, and thus increased the price of oil to highs not seen since the height of the Energy Crisis under Jimmy Carter.

    This, combined with the weakest economy since the Great Depression, badly damaged Reagan’s popularity going into the midterms.

    Unemployment approached 11.2% by November of 1982, and there was a perception that Ronald Reagan was completely ambivalent to the needs of working people.

    Meanwhile, in the area of foreign affairs, Congress grew increasingly concerned over Saddam Hussein’s efforts to commit genocide against the population of Khuzestan, and his renewed attacks on the Kurdish minority inside Iraq.

    As such, a bipartisan bill in Congress sponsored by Jesse Helms, Wendell Ford, Carl Levin, Dick Lugar, William Proxmire, Claiborne Pell and Joe Biden was put before the Congress.

    The bill, known as the Prevention of Genocide Act of 1982, was designed, in Senator Helms’ words to “help demonstrate to the Iraqi regime just how seriously our country views its campaign against the Kurds, and how disgusted we are in their treatment of the people Khuzestan. In addition, it will help assure that US tax dollars do not subsidize the Iraqis”.

    The drama of the Iranian coup, Khuzestan Oil Fires, and Reagan’s very public support for Iraq had brought international attention to events in the Gulf and created a desire among many to see Saddam punished for his actions. The very public utilization of gas attacks against ethnic minorities brought comparisons in the media and in Congress of Hitler’s genocidal barbarism before and during the Second World War.

    Impassioned speeches against Saddam’s genocidal behavior from the likes of Dick Luger, Joe Biden and others captured the public’s attention.

    Despite having wide bipartisan appeal, public support, and pressure from foreign lobbies from countries such as Israel, the bill was vetoed by Ronald Reagan, who claimed it would “do nothing to prevent genocide, negatively impact the economy of the United States, and compromise our strategic interests in the Middle East”.

    Vetoing the Prevention of Genocide Act created a firestorm of controversy among human rights activists, members of Congress, foreign governments, religious organizations, and the international community.

    This was yet another sign of Reagan’s ambivalence to the suffering of others, and Democrats made the reintroduction of the Prevention of Genocide Act a major issue leading into the midterms of 1982.

    With the terrible economy and controversy over foreign policy decisions of the Reagan White House, Republicans looked set to face a drubbing in November.
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter 3
  • CHAPTER 3:​

    “I've spoken recently of the freedom fighters of Nicaragua. You know the truth about them. You know who they're fighting and why. They are the moral equal of our Founding Fathers and the brave men and women of the French Resistance. We cannot turn away from them, for the struggle here is not right versus left; it is right versus wrong.”

    -- Reagan on the Contras, CPAC 1985​

    “As long as I’m in charge, the United States will continue to pursue a sound policy of building allies in the Middle East. That includes Iraq. I don’t believe it is fair, or right, for Congress to try and dictate to the White House what our foreign policy objectives are. ”

    Those were the words that had gotten Alexander Haig in his latest spot of trouble.

    His public critics, most of them Democrats but some Republicans too, argued that Haig was undermining both the President he served, and the Congress. They, and much of the public, viewed Haig’s comments as evidence that he would ignore or try to circumvent the will of Congress, with respect to such things as the Prevention of Genocide Act, if it were passed by the 98th Congress – which was likely, as if the polls were to be believed, the next Congress would be firmly Democratic.

    Haig immediately went into damage control, claiming that “of course we in the State Department will observe all laws passed by the Congress”.

    But Haig’s enemies inside the White House, and there were many, pounced on the moment of weakness and sought to kick the former General while he was down.

    Leaks and anonymous accounts from Reagan’s White House began pouring out to the media – horror stories of Haig’s overbearing style, his domineering personality in cabinet meetings, his lack of friends in the White House or at Foggy Bottom, his handling of the Israeli-Lebanon War and more.

    Efforts were made to remind the news media and the public of past mistakes by Haig also – his controversial comments on a “nuclear warning shot” against the Soviet Union, his downplaying of the slaying of nuns by American allies in El Salvador and more.

    It would only be a matter of weeks before Haig had decided that enough was enough. He privately told Reagan that he would resign in the new year and Reagan accepted it.

    The powers that be in the White House decided that Defense Secretary Weinberger would become Secretary of State, a position he’d long sought, while his replacement as Defense Secretary was yet to be determined.

    News of Haig’s impending departure and Weinberger’s ascendancy was leaked to the press only days later, causing another embarrassment for the Reagan administration.

    In a press conference a few days later, a frustrated Reagan told the media: “I was going to have an opening statement, but I decided that what I was going to say I wanted to get a lot of attention, so I’m going to wait and leak it.”

    This was yet another embarrassment for the embattled Reagan administration. But the lead up to the 1982 mid-terms would have one more surprise waiting around the corner.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 13th, 1982, a special 2-hour edition of ABC’s Nightline program aired to the public.

    Its subject was the Contra rebels inside Nicaragua, who fought a campaign against the leftist Sandinista government.

    This was the first major piece of news on the Contras to capture the American public, not least of all due to the man responsible for conducting interviews with local Nicaraguans on both sides of the conflict – Bill Stewart.

    Stewart’s celebrity status made him one of the most known newsmen in the United States, and the fact he had returned to Nicaragua, where he had endured a vicious beating at the hands of soldiers there, meant that few Americans could ignore his report.

    And it was a report which was utterly damning towards the Contras – claims that they bombed hospitals, schools, health clinics and civilians were backed up with footage and photos of wounded children, destroyed buildings and wailing civilians.

    Interviews with Sandinista politicians, and figures inside the Contras revealed another chilling truth to the American public – the US government, or more accurately the CIA, had a hand in training and arming these rebels.

    In particular, Stewart interviewed a Contra militia member and queried him about the large knife in his possession.

    “That’s a very large knife you have there,” Stewart said, “Who gave it to you? What do you use it for?”

    “An American gave me this knife. He was CIA or a commando or something.”, the man responded, with a chuckle, “I use it to kill people, to cut their throats”.

    The interview and irrefutable visual evidence, presented by one of the most trusted and beloved faces in American journalism, destroyed the credibility of the Contras in the eyes of the American public.

    The outcry among politicians inside the United States was swift

    Senator Ted Kennedy called for an end to all US government aid to the Contras, and Senator Joe Biden referred to the Contras as “terrorist thugs”.

    White House Press Secretary James Bradley was heavily criticized for claiming that Bill Stewart was “influenced or misled by the Sandinista regime into completely misrepresenting the Contra freedom fighters and what they stand for.”

    Eventually, the criticism got to a point where Ronald Reagan felt it necessary to give a radio address defending the Contras.

    “Good evening, my fellow Americans. Tonight, I’d like to speak with you regarding a topic that has been hotly debated these past few days – the Contra Freedom Fighters and our policy inside the Latin American nation of Nicaragua. Now, you might have heard allegations and accusations of improper, some claim terroristic, behavior from our Contra allies in their struggle against the oppressive Sandinista regime.

    Perhaps worse than that, you’ve heard that these same alleged acts of brutality have been sanctions, and even taught to them by our own intelligence services. Let me just say, right now for all of you listening at home, nothing could be further from the truth. It is a fact that the Contras are engaged in a violent struggle against their Marxist-Leninist oppressors. And it is a fact that we are helping them in this effort through material aid and training.

    But neither the training, nor any aid provided by us, was used to attack civilian targets inside Nicaragua.It is the goal of the Contras to liberate the people of Nicaragua from the communist puppet government that is presently denying them their democratic rights, and other such freedoms that we take for granted here in the United States. This goal could never be achieved if the Contras were to attack the very people they are trying to liberate.

    In their task, I truly believe they are the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers. And perhaps we have forgotten that the American Revolution was not won by men and women who begged and pleaded for freedom. No, George Washington and his fellow revolutionaries knew in their hearts that freedom is worth fighting and dying for. In that sense, our Founding Fathers are perhaps the original Contras. And those of us who stand with them in their struggles are Contras too.

    And if we turn out back against our Contra allies, what then? Will we allow the forces of Marxist-Leninism to take root here in our backyard? Will we allow the Sandinista regime to expand and spread through Latin America and reach its way up to us?

    I don’t believe the American people would stand for such a thing, and neither would I. In that sense, I believe we are all Contras. Rather than spreading salacious rumors, I believe we should come together to support our friends in Latin America, so that they might one day be free. That is all they are asking for – not for our troops. They are asking, as Churchill did during the Second World War, for the tools to finish the war themselves.

    To deny them the chance to claim their freedom goes against everything we believe as Americans.”

    Reagan’s speech was well received by conservatives and cold war hawks but did little to stem the tide of opposition toward the Contras by the wider public.

    It appeared that once again, the Reagan White House was on the opposing side of an issue with the American public.

    With the mid-terms on the horizon, Republicans braced for the culmination of the present administrations many mistakes and unpopular activities.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There were many stories to come out of the mid-term elections of 1982.

    Reagan’s recession, the multiple foreign policy controversies, the continuing “malaise” from the late 1970s – but perhaps nothing was quite as curious as the resurgent power of unions, who made themselves seen and heard in ways not seen in years.

    Following Reagan’s controversial dismissal of PATCO strikers, and the World Trade Center plane crash that followed, there was a groundswell of anger amongst trade unionists and blue-collar workers alike.

    Reagan’s policy of mass firings followed by the appointment of inadequate replacement workers and overworked staff to pick up the slack had been met with disaster. Those in the union movement used the outrage generated from the event and turned it into something productive – a renaissance in union organizing.

    “We have to stop what happened in New York from ever happening again,” said AFL-CIO President Lane Kirkland in a stump speech given us trade halls all throughout the United States, “and that can only come about when the Government, unions, and private industry come together and negotiate for the good of us all. It can’t happen by bullying or heavy-handed tactics by the President or anyone else. Ronald Reagan’s class war has already resulted in hundreds of lives loss, are we going to allow any more?”

    That last line often resulted in a loud response of “No!” from the crowd.

    In trying to break the back of unions and signal to employers that strong arming unions was an effective tactic, Reagan had courted disaster and given the trade union movement its biggest shot in the arm in generations.

    Reports would be made public that Reagan’s decision to fire PATCO strikers rather than negotiate, coupled with the World Trade Center plane crash and associated damage to New York, and disruption of the Stock Market, cost billions of dollars more than if he had accepted the demands of the union.

    Union leaders created councils of unemployed union members to act as union organizers and activists, and new members were required to sign up one sympathetic friend or family member. Former PATCO members fired by Reagan were essential figures in this effort.

    The reinvigorated union movement campaigned hard against Reagan’s policies in 1984, criticizing the PATCO strike, the continued struggles in the civil aviation industry, his appointments to the National Labor Relations Board, his economy policy that had resulted in recession and more.

    They campaigned heavily against Republicans, and generally lent their support to union friendly Democrats in key races. They wanted to, in the words of Kirkland, “send a message to Ronald Reagan – if you want to wage a class war on us, we’ll fight back”.

    The unions had seen a sharp rise in membership since the events of early 1981, and this new, well organized campaign was sure to have an influence in the mid-terms.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another figure who had risen from the ashes to challenge Ronald Reagan’s first two years in office was none other than former Vice President Walter Mondale.

    Fighting Fritz campaigned aggressively, all across the nation leading up to November 2nd, 1982. True to his nickname, he leveled blistering attacks against Reagan’s performance as President, blaming him for the economic recession, the death of the ERA, soaring unemployment and interest rates, cutting social security, trying to gut Medicare, favoring the rich, a cruel and incompetent foreign policy, as well as attacking the union movement.

    In a speech before the Human Rights Campaign Fund, Mondale claimed that, ''of all the principles the Reagan Administration is weakening, the most important in the long run may well be this country's commitment to universal human rights”.

    Mondale visited the site of the World Trade Center, still in the process of being repaired, and called it “Ronald Reagan’s greatest failure”.

    He campaigned in the South, the Midwest, and the West Coast. He made an effort to be in as many states as possible, appearing on local news and in newspapers.

    He sought to redeem the Carter administration in the eyes of the public, telling audiences across the nation: “'We told the truth, obeyed the law and kept the peace”.

    But for as important as these midterms were, Mondale had another reason for campaigning – he was raising his profile and networking for the 1984 election. With Reagan’s presidency in such a state, Mondale saw a golden opportunity to make his run for the White House and hoist the banner of liberalism up again for another generation, as Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Jimmy Carter had done.

    But first, they had to clear the way by a strong showing in these midterms.

    Mondale was optimistic about the chances of many exciting Democrats, and even privately began looking at promising candidates for a running mate, should he win his party’s nomination in 1984.

    In particular, Tom Bradley’s campaign for the Governorship of California excited Walter Mondale. To have an African American elected to the Governorship of the largest state in the union would be a watershed moment in the history of the United States. He could just imagine how proud Hubert Humphrey would be.

    With Bradley solidly ahead on the polls riding a wave of support, he looked like he just might pull off the victory.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    November 2nd, 1982 was a referendum on Ronald Reagan’s Presidency to that point, and a clear message was sent – voters wanted change.

    Democrats, who already controlled the House of Representatives, saw an additional 31 seats added to their total, resulting in a strong majority of 274 seats.

    Meanwhile, Republicans were left with 160 seats, with the lone member of the Conservative Party, William Carney, causing with Republicans.

    The results in the Senate, which Republicans controlled, was even more disheartening.

    Despite a favorable Senate map, Democrats made considerable gains in the Senate, with a net gain of 8 seats.

    Incumbents John Danforth, John Chafee, Harrison Schmitt, Robert Stafford, David Durenberger, and Lowell Weicker lost re-election to their Democratic challengers.

    Of the three Senators who retired in this election, 2 of the seats were won by Democrats.

    In New Jersey, Frank Lautenberg defeated Millicent Fenwick to replace interim appointee Nicholas F. Brady. The retiring incumbent, Brady, had been appointed in April of 1982, following his predecessor’s conviction for taking bribes.

    In Virginia, Dick Davis narrowly defeated his Republican opponent, Paul Trible, to replace retiring incumbent Harry F. Byrd Jr.

    Bucking the trend, in California, Pete Wilson narrowly defeated the controversial governor Jerry Brown to become the junior Senator from California.

    This Senate result in California was a small bright spot, but the results of the state’s gubernatorial election was yet to be determined.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As Mayor of Los Angeles, Tom Bradley had the perfect base from which to launch a campaign for the Governorship of California. Since the early 1970s, he’d been one of the most visible men in the state, and built a powerful coalition of black, Latino, Asian and Jewish voters, alongside church leaders and white liberal voters.

    George Deukmejian, California’s Attorney General and the Republic nominee for Governor, accused Bradley of being anti-police, and cutting 600 police from the streets.

    The attack was effective, and despite being a former police officer himself, ate into his double-digit lead. Furthermore, Deukmejian criticized Bradley for the rising rates of murder and robbery in Los Angeles.

    However, the economy remained the number one concern for California voters come along day, and most residents were frustrated with economic performance under Reagan.

    Still, Bradley maintained a 6-point lead on the eve of the election day. Exit polls supported the relatively clear Bradley victory, leading to some news organizations to project a Bradley victory early in the night.

    However, the election itself proved far closer than the exit polls predicted.

    While Bradley won the majority of votes cast on election day, but absentee ballots ate into his lead substantially.

    It would be several weeks, and a recount, before the result would be known to California voters. In the end, Mayor Tom Bradley had won with a razor thin 0.3% vote margin ahead of Deukmejian.

    With his victory, Tom Bradley had become the first-ever elected African American governor. The state that had produced Ronald Reagan’s political ascendancy would now be governed by the first popularly elected African American governor.

    Bradley’s election was international news, and a major cause for celebration among Democrats, but even more so amongst the wider African American community.

    In his victory speech, Bradley spoke of unity and the need for Californians to come together.

    “The time is now for all of us from across this Golden State to bridge the divide that exists between the land we live in, and the land we want for our children. Together we will turn our dreams into reality, and I look forward to working with people of all parties, backgrounds, and beliefs to build a better California. ”

    Bradley was joined by other victories newly elected Democratic Governors, 9 in total including himself.

    They were:
    • Adlai Stevenson III of Illinois
    • Allan Ertel of Pennsylvania
    • Bill Clinton of Arkansas (avenging his loss from 1980)
    • Bill Sheffield of Alaska
    • James Blanchard of Michigan
    • Rudy Perpich of Minnesota
    • Bob Kerrey of Nebraska
    • Richard Bryan of Nevada
    • Dick Celeste of Ohio
    • Mark White of Texas
    • Tony Earl of Wisconsin.
    Hugh Gallen was able to successfully win re-election, which brought the Democrats total number of Governors up to 38, while Republicans only held 12. Gallen would survive a near fatal blood infection following the election, but he would return full time to his duties in early 1983.

    All things considered, however, for as many victories as Democrats enjoyed during the 1982 midterms, none were as sweet as Tom Bradley’s historic triumph. It signaled that a whole new era in American politics had begun.

    Reagan’s Revolution had faced a liberal counterrevolution. What this meant for 1984, few could say, but the nation and the world would watch the results intently.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The full results in the Senate were as follows:

    SENATE RESULTS:

    Arizona: Dennis DeConcini (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    California: Pete Wilson (R) wins an open race, replacing S. I. Hayakawa (R) (R hold)
    Connecticut: Toby Moffett (D) defeats incumbent Lowell Weicker (R) (D gain from R)
    Delaware: William Roth (R) wins re-election (R hold)
    Florida: Lawton Chiles (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    Hawaii: Spark Matsunaga (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    Indiana: Richard Luger (R) wins re-election (R hold)
    Maine: Interim appointment George J Mitchell (D) elected to full term (D hold)
    Maryland: Paul Sarbanes (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    Massachusetts: Ted Kennedy (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    Michigan: Donald Riegle (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    Minnesota: Mark Dayton (D) defeats David Durenberg (R) (D gain from R)
    Mississippi: John C. Stennis (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    Missouri: Harriet Woods (D) defeats incumbent John Danforth (R) (D gain)
    Montana: John Melcher (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    Nebraska: Edward Zorinsky (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    Nevada: Howard Cannon (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    New Jersey: Frank Lautenberg (D) defeats Millicent Fenwick (R), replacing incumbent Nicholas F. Brady (R) (D gain)
    New Mexico: Jeff Bingaman (D) defeats Harrison Schmitt (R) (D gain from R)

    New York: Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    North Dakota: Quentin Burdick (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    Ohio: Howard Metzenbaum (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    Pennsylvania: John Heinz (R) wins re-election (R hold)
    Rhode Island: Julius C. Michaelson (D) defeats incumbent John Chafee (R) (D gain from R)
    Tennessee: Jim Sasser wins re-election (D hold)
    Texas: Lloyd Bentsen (D) wins re-election
    Utah: Orin Hatch (R) wins re-election
    Vermont: James A. Guest (D) defeats incumbent Robert Stafford (R) (D gain from R)
    Virginia: Dick Davis (D) defeats Paul Trible (R) to replace Harry F. Byrd Jr (I) (D gain from I)

    Washington: Henry M. Jackson (D) wins re-election (D hold)
    West Virginia: Robert Byrd (D) wins re-election
    Wisconsin: William Proximire (D) wins re-election
    Wyoming: Malcolm Wallop (R) wins relection (R hold)

    DEMOCRATS: 52 (+8)

    REPUBLICANS: 47 (-7)

    INDEPENDENTS: 0 (-1)


    HOUSE RESULTS:

    Democratic seats
    : 274 (+31)

    Republican seats: 160 (-31)


    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With the Democrats sweeping victory in 1982, the gains made by Reagan had almost completely evaporated.

    Robert Byrd would be assuming the role of Senate Majority Leader, and Tip O’Neil had tightened his control over the House of Representatives.

    Reagan, who’d already struggled to implement his agenda in the Congress, would face obstruction all the way leading up to 1984.

    In a brief address to the press, Reagan lamented that while some races were close, his party had been dealt a blow. All the same, he promised to work with the next Congress “to pass an agenda that would get the government off the back of the people and get this nation back to work”.

    Following the Republican Party’s dismal showing, there was a major internal debate inside the White House as to how Reagan would proceed.

    Reagan’s California loyalists argued that the President should do what he did when faced with an overwhelming Democratic state legislature in California – compromise with them where possible and double down on popular positions, rely on tough-on-crime policies and strong conservative rhetoric to keep the Republican base happy.

    Those newer in Reagan’s circle, who entered his orbit during his entrance into national politics, argued for an agenda of total resistance, relying extensively on the President’s veto powers, and claiming that the Democrat’s tax and spend agenda would result in even worse economic conditions.

    Reagan, as he always did when faced with internal division, tried to chart a course between the two options, to make both groups happy. Oftentimes, this resulted in neither group being satisfied.

    Reagan’s White House, already a den of dysfunction, was sent into a tailspin. With the impending exit of Alexander Haig, a major cabinet reshuffle could hopefully offer a semblance of order to a deeply troubled administration.

    Or perhaps this was yet another shift that would doom Reagan’s Presidency. Time would tell.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final nail in the coffin of Reagan’s annus horribilis was the passage of the Boland Amendment in December of 1982.

    As part of the House Appropriations Bill of 1982, which was attached as a rider to the Defense Appropriations Act of 1983, the Boland amendment sated that “no funds available to the Central Intelligence Agency, the Department of Defense, or any other agency or entity of the United States involved in intelligence activities may be obligated or expended for the purpose or which would have the effect of supporting, directly or indirectly, military or paramilitary operations in Nicaragua by any nation, group, organization, movement or individual”.

    In effect, this completely prevented the Reagan administration from sending money or aid to the Contras.

    The Boland Amendment, named for its author, Democratic Congressman Representative Edward Boland, essentially forbade Reagan’s administration aiding the Contras efforts to overthrow the Sandinista government.

    The amendment, and the extensive nature of the wording, was brought about due to strong opposition to the Contras among the American people following Bill Stewart’s expose. Edward Boland wanted to be absolutely certain that the White House could not support the Contras any longer – such an effort would badly damage American credibility abroad, and be against the wishes of much of the American public at home.

    Reagan, wary of his weakened position following the disastrous midterms, signed the bill.

    However, he began to tout private enterprise efforts to fund the Contras, through private entities such as the Nicaraguan Democratic Force and the World Anti-Communist League. Within weeks of the Boland Amendment, millions of dollars were pouring into these groups to fund the continued efforts of the Contra guerrillas.

    Of these efforts, Reagan said:

    “Private citizens and supporters of freedom around the globe are now the Nicaraguan peoples’ best hope. The new Democratic Congress has seen fit to strangle the Contras' efforts to defeat Soviet-backed tyranny in their homeland, but the American people have shown they will not abandon our friends in Nicaragua or anywhere else. As it has always been throughout our history, where Washington politicians fail, the American people step up to do what is right.”

    As 1982 ended and 1983 began, the year did not start off on a positive note. The stress of the past 2 ineffective and troubled years had been too much for White House Deputy Chief of Staff Michael Deaver, who already hated living in Washington, DC. He would leave at the start of the new year. He would be replaced by Edwin Meese, who was serving as Counselor to the President until his appointment to the position.

    Any hopes of the 1983 starting off better than 1982 had ended when the 98th Congress met and sought to rectify one of the great Reagan controversies of the previous year.

    Another aspect of Reagan’s foreign policy, closer relations with Iraq, was dealt a blow in January of 1983 when the new 98th Congress reintroduced the Prevention of Genocide Act.

    The Prevention of Genocide Act 1983 maintained the goal of its predecessor – to punish Saddam Hussein’s regime for its gas attacks of the Kurds and genocidal repression of population of Khuzestan.

    Again championed by Jesse Helms, the act would do the following:
    • Requires the U.S. Executive Director or representative at all international financial institutions to vote against all loans to Iraq.
    • Prohibits the provision of any assistance, the sale of any kind of military equipment, the provision of any credits, or the provision of any credit guarantees to Iraq.
    • Prohibits the sale or transfer to Iraq of any item subject to export control by any agency of the United States.
    • Prohibits the importation of any oil or petroleum products produced in Iraq.
    These sanctions could be waived by the President, only if proof was given that Saddam had stopped his genocidal activities. But that was highly unlikely, and both the White House and Congress knew it.

    The act was again sent to Reagan’s desk, who again vetoed it. But this time, the veto was overridden by the Congress. It was the first time in the 20th century that a President had his veto overridden on foreign policy legislation.

    With yet another embarrassment, Reagan and his White House staff could not hide their displeasure.

    With the departure of Alexander Haig, Casper Weinberger was appointed to the position of Secretary of State with little opposition. As he was the incumbent Secretary of Defense, however, a replacement had to be found.

    Reagan’s White House staff had the perfect candidate in mind.

    They did not want to take anyone out of the House or Senate, given the recent losses suffered. While the mid-terms had been devastating for Republicans generally, for one man, an opportunity presented itself.

    Former Governor of Texas Bill Clements was one of many Republican politicians to be ousted from office in 1982. Prior to being elected Governor of Texas, he served as Deputy Secretary of Defense, and briefly as Acting Defense Secretary in the Nixon and Ford administrations.

    He had a wealth of executive experience as Governor and had done the job before.

    Clements appointment to the position of Secretary of Defense was met with some opposition among Democrats, but he was accepted by the Senate all the same.

    With the departure of Haig, and with Weinberger and Clements now in place, Reagan looked forward to a new and better year in 1983.

    However, he was not yet ready to abandon the Contras, or his plans to make a reliable ally out of Iraq. Israel was privately furious with the United States for allowing Iraq to decisively win the war with Iran, but if Iraq could be brought into the fold, things would improve considerably.

    Weinberger and National Security Advisor William P. Clark Jr both tilted towards Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War in any case, so Reagan’s desire to build a relationship between the two nations appealed to them.

    Reagan made clear that his two top priorities in the new year was to keep the Contras afloat in Nicaragua and maintain the strategic opening that had come about with regard to Iraq.

    In making this proclamation, Reagan committed perhaps the gravest mistake of his Presidency.
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter 4
  • CHAPTER 4​

    "I like Mondale, actually. I would vote for him. But I think in this election, the only person who is going to beat Ronald Reagan is Reagan himself."

    -- Hunter S. Thompson, in a speech at UCLA, February 1984
    “Today I declare my candidacy for President of the United States.

    I do so with thanks to the people of Minnesota. Because of you, for twenty years I have been privileged to serve in this Capitol, in the United States Senate, and in the second highest office in the land. Today I ask your help again.

    In the small communities of southern Minnesota where I grew up, we believed in some old American value's that don't need any updating.

    When I look back on all the troubles my parents had losing the farm, the Depression, sickness--what strikes me is how our beliefs pulled us through. My dad was a minister. And my mother filled our home and our church with love and music.

    We were rural people: we knew that hard work was the only way to make it. And we knew, as O. E. Rolvaag put it, "No matter where we've come from, we all have the same job--to push together for the goal that mankind has been seeking ever since it was the first day…We're here to build for a greater justice among men and women."

    That's what Minnesota is all about.

    Our country, too, is built on community. We depend on one another--children on parents; cities on farmers; civilians on soldiers; seniors on workers; citizens on public servants; the sick, the handicapped, and the unemployed on us all.

    With these values, we've accomplished miracles. Each new challenge--rebuilding Europe, conquering space, defeating hunger--we’ve met.

    But now we in this generation must meet our own challenges.

    A generation ago, this country stocked the shelves of the world. Now it's hard to find a basic American industry in shape for the future.

    Once we were building the most ambitious highway system on earth. Now our economy is dodging potholes.

    Once our scientists were sending us to the moon. Now there are fewer physics teachers than school districts.

    Once this abundant country was nearly self-sufficient. Now our energy supply depends too much on a foreign cartel.

    Once we were rich, and our allies were poor. Now they are strong, too, and to lead them, we must persuade them.

    Once the nuclear age was dominated by us. Now the arms race threatens the fate of the earth.

    We know we can't solve our own problems by repeating our parents' answers. As John Gardner once said, "A nation is never finished. You can't build it and then leave it standing like the pharaohs did the pyramids. It has to be built and rebuilt. It has to be re-created in each generation by believing, caring men and women. It is our turn now. If we don't believe or don't care, nothing can save the nation. If we believe and care, nothing can stop us.

    Nothing will stop us. Because the future is made for America--Name an advantage that the future requires, and you'll see an asset we already have.

    In the years ahead, everything will depend on economic growth: our jobs, our defense, our fight for social justice.

    To get our economy growing again will take people--the skills, discoveries, creativity, and the spirit of all Americans.

    We must become an America where children master basic skills again; whose parents are partners with schools again; whose teachers are rewarded and raise standards again; whose students get the financial aid they need again; whose graduates have tools for a lifetime of learning; whose employers invest in a lifetime of training; and whose educators steer this generation toward excellence.

    We must become an America where students speak the language of science; whose engineers invent the future; where the arts and humanities enrich our spirit; where libraries and laboratories are the best in the world; and where scientists train the next generation of genius.

    We must have an America whose schools teach the languages of the globe; whose colleges teach the cultures of the world; whose diplomats speak the languages of their hosts; whose exporters speak the languages of their markets; and whose fluency launches a new generation of growth.

    Next, the future will require international competitiveness. And our nation has the capacity to compete again.

    The heart of competitiveness must be a strong new national policy to strengthen entrepreneurship, small business, and free enterprise.

    We must have an America where entrepreneurs have the capital to get going; inventors have the risk-takers to back them; businesses have the talent to staff them; products have the foreign markets they need; and capitalists create a new generation of jobs.

    I offer a Presidency that promotes exports aggressively, tears down barriers to the sales of our services, and insists that our trading partners open their markets as wide to us as we open ours to them.

    I propose an era when harbors are being deepened, bridges strengthened, highways repaved, and railroads rebuilt.

    I propose a nation whose factories are the most efficient in the world; whose merger barons stop shuffling assets, and start modernizing equipment; and whose short-term profits become long-term investments.

    I propose an America where labor and management put the old bitterness behind them; workers are retrained for the jobs of the future; quality is rising, and absenteeism is falling; and government is a force for restructuring and renewal.

    Next, I seek the Presidency to restore our global leadership.

    Our President must understand and bolster all our real advantages: military effectiveness, economic strength, energy independence, moral authority, alliances that no enemy can weaken, and defenses that no nation dare challenge.

    We must be an America whose social justice at home attracts friendship abroad, and whose voice condemns repression--from the camps of the Russian Gulag to the jails of the Latin generals.

    We must see the world as it really is--an arena for a competition America can win, where our freedom, our values, and our achievements are a magnet for all the world.

    Finally, I enter this race not just to seek a victory, but to point toward sanity.

    Our determination to reduce the nuclear risk must be unquestioned in Europe and around the world again.

    We must stand by the ABM treaty, resubmit the SALT treaty, and negotiate a comprehensive test ban treaty.

    We must block the spread of nuclear weapons to new nations, and control exports that can be turned into bomb factories.

    We must have a President who masters the arms control process, does the hard bargaining with the Soviets, negotiates a mutual and verifiable nuclear freeze, and at long last reverses this mindless, wasteful madness.

    This is the nation's agenda--and mine. I ask for your mandate to seize the American advantage--to invest in our values, our talent, our competitiveness, our strength, and our survival.

    No President can do that alone, and so I ask for something more: I ask the American people to give their best.

    I call for stronger families. There isn't a single problem that can be solved without the values we learn at home: to work hard, tell the truth, obey the law, and cherish our faith.

    I call for tougher discipline. You can't become a biochemist by osmosis: it takes excellence. You can't deter crime by ignoring it: it takes punishment.

    I call for cooperation. Everyone must contribute; all must sacrifice. When we fight amongst ourselves and pit American against American, we all suffer.

    And I call for realism. There is a long haul ahead. Politicians must stop peddling quick fixes, and all of us must remember that education, training, research, enterprise, and all things that count take time.

    Americans have not lost their knack for greatness. As Barbara Tuchman has written, "The urge for the best is an element of humankind as inherent as the heartbeat."

    But when people do their best, their effort must be rewarded. Today that bargain is not being honored enough.

    Too many families are suffering the consequences of high deficits--record real interest rates, rising taxes, unemployment, and bankruptcy. All across the nation, our states are being cruelly forced to raise taxes and slash services, weakening our federal system.

    We must have an America where working people don't have to pay more so that the privileged can pay less. I call on Congress to chop those deficits down, scale the defence budget to reality, repeal the scheduled tax cuts for the wealthy, repeal indexing, and keep our tax system progressive.

    Too many Americans are losing their trust in government. They expect their President to faithfully execute the laws of the land. Yet they see this Administration cynically undermining and betraying the laws protecting our air, our water, and our land.

    To earn public trust, our government must be on the side of the vulnerable. We must continue the long American march to broader liberties. Before this decade is over, I want to go to an inauguration where a President swears to "preserve, protect, and defend" a Constitution that contains the Equal Rights Amendment.

    Too many people tell me they feel swept away by the tidal wave of special interest money that is swamping our political system. And I agree.

    To dramatize the need for change, my campaign will accept no contributions from political action committees. And I will work to slap controls on PACs, clamp ceilings on campaign spending, close the independent committee loopholes and finance Congressional campaigns publicly.

    Ours must be a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. I say it is time to declare that the government of the United States is not up for sale. It belongs to the American people, and we want it back.

    If we restore trust, government can act.

    While government can be a problem, it is not the problem. Human suffering, a faltering economy, a dangerous arms race, a divided America: these are the problems.

    Today, there are American families sleeping in cars, searching for work, and lasting the grapes of wrath: these are our true problems. I believe in social decency, not social Darwinism.

    What I am saying is this: If we are to pursue the goals that strengthen our nation, we must have a strong, effective, caring government, worthy of public trust.

    I know I do not begin this journey alone. I begin it here with you, my friends who started me in public life and who have sustained me over the years. I start it with my wife, Joan, and our children, and my family. You've helped me before; please help me once again.

    I know we will win. We have a plan for the future. We have everything we need to renew our country. But the American people understand that we also need a President who knows what he's doing.

    I do --thanks to you. I served as Attorney-General for four years, and I know state government. I served in the United States Senate for twelve years. Thanks to you, and the American people, I was proud to serve under President Carter as Vice President.

    I have the experience. I know where the talent is. I know the White House. I know how to shape a government. I know how to manage. I know the Congress. I know how to defend this country. I know how to search for peace. I know who our friends are. I'm on to our enemies. I know our people. And I know myself: I am ready. I am ready to be President of the United States.

    I am ready, and so are the American people.

    I've traveled this country more than any living American. I know what our people want. They want to get on with it.

    We've had Vietnam; it's over. We've had Watergate; it's behind us. We've tried quick fixes; they don't work. We want our edge back. Schools must teach again. Americans must work again. Convicted criminals must go to jail again. Our nation must lead the world again.

    Americans want to get going. They're confident. They're ready. And so am I.

    Thank you very much.

    I am ready, and so are the American people.”

    With these words on February 21st, 1983, Walter Mondale had launched his campaign to take back in the White House.

    With unemployment nearing 12%, a severe recession, Democratic control of both Houses of Congress, and Reagan’s approval rating at an abysmal 31%, the prospects of a Democratic victory in 1984 looked promising.

    However, he was hardly the only Democratic hopeful to notice this. California Senator Alan Cranston and Colorado Senator Gary Hart had both announced their candidacies already, and former Governor of Florida Reuben Askew would join the race only days following Mondale’s own announcement.

    The former Vice President sought to strike while the iron was hot, hitting the campaign trail and meeting with constituency groups all across America. He went to factories, college campuses, local city halls, and more, preaching the ideals of the liberalism that he had

    “Ronald Reagan quotes Franklin Roosevelt”, Mondale would claim, “but he governs like Herbert Hoover”.

    That line, suggested by Mondale’s campaign manager Bob Beckel, rarely failed to provoke applause or laughter from a crowd.

    Mondale didn’t see any major candidates who might threaten his rise to the nomination, or at least, not at this point. Cranston had too many eccentricities, Askew was too socially conservative, and Hart was a relative unknown.

    While more candidates were likely to jump into the race, for now, Mondale believed he was a clear front runner.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    March saw a number of events that heightened Cold War tensions. On the 8th of March, Reagan addressed the National Association of Evangelicals in Orlando, Florida.

    There, he gave perhaps one of his most famous speeches, in which he declared the Soviet Union “an evil empire”:

    “Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in that totalitarian darkness—pray they will discover the joy of knowing God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the supremacy of the State, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world .... So, in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride—the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.”

    Through this speech, Reagan made clear his opposition to peace movements, such as the Nuclear Freeze. It was the height of Reagan’s ideological fervor and anti-communist rhetoric.

    This was pounded when, on the evening of 23rd of March, 1983, Ronald Reagan gave a speech on his latest defense program – the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI):

    “Let me share with you a vision of the future which offers hope. It is that we embark on a program to counter the awesome Soviet missile threat with measures that are defensive. Let us turn to the very strengths in technology that spawned our great industrial base and that have given us the quality of life we enjoy today.

    What if free people could live secure in the knowledge that their security did not rest upon the threat of instant U.S. retaliation to deter a Soviet attack, that we could intercept and destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reached our own soil or that of our allies?

    I know this is a formidable, technical task, one that may not be accomplished before the end of this century. Yet, current technology has attained a level of sophistication where it's reasonable for us to begin this effort. It will take years, probably decades of effort on many fronts. There will be failures and setbacks, just as there will be successes and breakthroughs. And as we proceed, we must remain constant in preserving the nuclear deterrent and maintaining a solid capability for flexible response. But isn't it worth every investment necessary to free the world from the threat of nuclear war? We know it is.

    In the meantime, we will continue to pursue real reductions in nuclear arms, negotiating from a position of strength that can be ensured only by modernizing our strategic forces. At the same time, we must take steps to reduce the risk of a conventional military conflict escalating to nuclear war by improving our nonnuclear capabilities.

    America does possess -- now -- the technologies to attain very significant improvements in the effectiveness of our conventional, nonnuclear forces. Proceeding boldly with these new technologies, we can significantly reduce any incentive that the Soviet Union may have to threaten attack against the United States or its allies.

    As we pursue our goal of defensive technologies, we recognize that our allies rely upon our strategic offensive power to deter attacks against them. Their vital interests and ours are inextricably linked. Their safety and ours are one. And no change in technology can or will alter that reality. We must and shall continue to honor our commitments.

    I clearly recognize that defensive systems have limitations and raise certain problems and ambiguities. If paired with offensive systems, they can be viewed as fostering an aggressive policy, and no one wants that. But with these considerations firmly in mind, I call upon the scientific community in our country, those who gave us nuclear weapons, to turn their great talents now to the cause of mankind and world peace, to give us the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete.

    Tonight, consistent with our obligations of the ABM treaty and recognizing the need for closer consultation with our allies, I'm taking an important first step. I am directing a comprehensive and intensive effort to define a long-term research and development program to begin to achieve our ultimate goal of eliminating the threat posed by strategic nuclear missiles. This could pave the way for arms control measures to eliminate the weapons themselves. We seek neither military superiority nor political advantage. Our only purpose -- one all people share -- is to search for ways to reduce the danger of nuclear war.

    My fellow Americans, tonight we're launching an effort which holds the promise of changing the course of human history. There will be risks, and results take time. But I believe we can do it. As we cross this threshold, I ask for your prayers and your support.

    Thank you, good night, and God bless you.”

    Democrats immediately jumped on Reagan’s proposal. Mondale accused Reagan of trying “to turn the heavens into a battleground” while Senator Ted Kennedy accused the Reagan administration of “reckless Star Wars schemes”.

    Thus, the Strategic Defense Initiative became primarily called by the nickname ‘Star Wars’ or the ‘Star Wars program’. This would severely undercut public confidence in the program.

    With the recession hitting its rock bottom, and unemployment hitting 12%, the American people were frustrated that Reagan was pursuing some fanciful, possibly dangerous goal of lasers in space while millions were out of work and the economy was in shambles.

    Still, March would mark the worst of the recession. The economy would begin to improve through the rest of 1983.

    For now, however, Reagan had to endure criticism over his latest endeavor to reform America’s defense system.

    In truth, he had yet to have any major foreign policy victory – he had not made any substantial negotiations with the Soviets, and although he had sought to restore the strength and prestige into the spirit of America’s military following the embarrassments of Vietnam, he had yet to be successful in that effort.

    He could only hope that the current policy of aiding the Contras and building relations with Saddam’s Iraq could bear fruit.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In early April of 1983, William P. Clark, and a small team of others inside the National Security Council, including Oliver North, landed in Baghdad using fake Irish passports, transported by a Saudi Arabian plane. There, they would meet with Iraqi officials and begin negotiating over a period of three days.

    The plan, developed by North and Clark, involved sending American weapons through Saudi contacts, chiefly Adnan Khashoggi, to Saddam’s Iraq. In exchange, Saddam would agree to not influence global energy markets with his newfound supply of oil from Khuzestan in such a way that would damage the US economy or national security. Furthermore, he would agree not to produce any nuclear weapons with the French-backed nuclear reactor they intended to build. Clark also sought assurances that Saddam would avoid direct attacks on Israel, so long as they were covertly being supplied with weapons by the US.

    Saddam agreed to all these demands, and exchange, received the first in would become many shipments of arms and spare parts to repair arms already in Iraq’s possession. These arms would be sold to Saddam at a substantial markup, and the excess profits would then fund the Contra’s guerrilla activities.

    Oliver North believed the plan quite ingenious and said in an Iraqi hotel room that their excursion to Baghdad with fake names and passports “felt like something out of a James Bond film”. That was North in a nutshell – ambitious, hungry for adventure, and confident to the point of being foolhardy.

    And in this instance, he was completely right. The plan itself was like something out of a spy thriller – it involved secret code names, offshore shell companies, Swiss bank accounts and other such details that would make the case irresistible to the news media and the public.

    Clark himself was not nearly so jovial about the exercise. They were directly violating both the Boland Amendment, and the Prevention of Genocide Act.

    If word got about this deal, it could destroy Reagan’s presidency.

    However, it was Lebanon, not Iraq, that would provide the next headache for the Reagan administration.

    On the 18th of April, 1983, an explosion rocked the US Embassy in Beirut, killing 63 people. It was later determined that a suicide bomber working on behalf of the Hezbollah terrorist group drove a van into the compound and detonated it near the entrance of the main building.

    International condemnation was swift, with Reagan calling it a "vicious terrorist bombing" and a "cowardly act," saying, "This criminal act on a diplomatic establishment will not deter us from our goals of peace in the region.”

    Iranian President Banisadr denounced the bombing also, calling Hezbollah “followers of Khomeini’s false revolution” and denied any involvement, claiming that “Iran seeks only peaceful co-existence with other nations”.

    Banisadr had long disagreed with the idea of exporting the revolution, even prior to the coup that had placed him in power. He had reason to fear Hezbollah as well – they were followers of Khomeini’s ideas, and it would surely not be long before they turned their attention to the new Democratic Republic of Iran.

    With their ability to produce oil severely impacted by the loss of Khuzestan, and after the chaos of a war with Iraq and a civil war internally, the last thing that Banisadr needed was a conflict with the United States.

    He still resented America, and claimed, both publicly and privately, that US imperialism was the greatest threat to Iran. But pragmatism had to be the way forward for the new Iran.

    Privately and discreetly, Banisadr got word to US officials that he would work to stem the tide of support from Iranian groups if Reagan agreed to remove US forces from Lebanon.

    The less Americans in the Middle East, the better.

    Reagan, as he often did, was able to twist this event into something the American people could accept, by virtue of his effective, positive oratory:

    “Good evening, my fellow Americans. I wanted to speak to you about events in Lebanon yesterday. The cowardly terror attack on embassy was designed to make us rethink our effort to bring peace to that troubled region of the world. Tonight, I can affirm to the American people and the world that this effort has failed.

    In fact, it has brought the US and the other nations of the world closer together. Leaders on the Middle East have seen the extent that terrorist groups will go to carry out their evil deeds, and they know, as we know, that there is no one they will not target. No man, woman, or child is out of bounds when it comes to acts of terror.

    In trying to tear us apart, these terror groups have brought the United States and Mid-East Governments together. We’ve seen an outpouring of grief and support from the leaders and peoples from nations such as Saudi Arabia, Israel, Iraq, Lebanon, and yes, even the new government in Iran – we might not be allies with all of these nations I just mentioned, we are all bound together by the threat of radical terrorist action.

    It is for this reason that I am announcing the next phase in our plan to bring peace to Lebanon – it involves the phased withdrawal of US troops, and a bolstering of UN coalition forces in Lebanon. This is far from a retreat, it is a rethinking of our current strategy – we will redouble our diplomatic efforts for peace, while sharing the load for security and peacekeeping operations with the other nations of the world.”

    Reagan’s speech was met with a largely positive reaction from Congress, who largely believed, in the words of Barry Goldwater, it was “time to bring the boys home” from Lebanon.

    With that, the next few weeks saw a gradual withdraw of US forces from Lebanon, as the new Iranian government quietly worked to cut off all private aid from Iranian sources to Hezbollah. Most of this aid came from sectarian groups who largely hated or directly conspired against President Banisadr.

    He publicly celebrated the “retreat of America’s imperial forces” from Lebanon, but privately recognized that their shared opposition to Khomeini-ism made them reluctant, uneasy allies in private.

    It was yet another uneasy alliance the Reagan White House had to manage.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As 1983 rolled on, tensions between the United States and Soviet Union only increased.

    On September 1st, the Korean Air Lines Flight 007 was scheduled to travel from New York to Seoul via Anchorage, Alaska.

    However, a navigational mistake saw the KAL flight enter Soviet Airspace, and it was shot down by a Soviet Su-15 interceptor. Among those killed in the attack was Georgia Congressman Larry MacDonald, also President of the John Birch Society.

    The Soviet leader, Yuri Andrapov, on the advice of his defense minister Dmitriy Ustinov, remained completely silent about what had transpired. However, intercepted Soviet communications quickly revealed the truth.

    Reagan released these communications to the public and gave a speech on the 5th of September, which he called the downing of the airliner a “crime against humanity must never be forgotten, here or throughout the world”.

    Democrats in Congress and union officials questioned whether a lack of experienced air traffic control staff contributed to the disaster, but there was no evidence to suggest this and that line of investigation was dropped. The public response among the American people, and much of the world, was anger directed at the Soviet Union.

    To many Americans, this act justified Reagan’s description of the Soviet Union as an “Empire of Evil”.

    A US-Soviet Summit between Secretary of State Casper Weinberger and Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko on the 8th only served to exacerbate tensions. Secretary Weinberger, following the conference, stated that “Gromyko’s responses today seem to me, as though he is a man trying to cover up a horrible crime.”

    Reagan also ordered the Federal Aviation Administration to revoke the license of Aeroflot Soviet Airlines, preventing it from operating in the United States.

    The official line of the Soviet Union was that the flight was an American spy mission, and they offered no apology for the attack, instead blaming the CIA for what it alleges was a “criminal, provocative act".

    Anger on both sides was near a boiling point.

    US-Soviet relations had scarcely been worse. The remaining months of 1983 would prove to be the most dangerous period in the Cold War, comparable only to the Cuban Missile Crisis.
     
    Last edited:
    Pop Culture Intermission: Superman III
  • Pop Culture ITTL: Superman III​

    “A new alien menace threatens on Earth – with Superman under his control! Who will save us now?”

    -- The tagline to Superman III (1983)​

    November of 1983 saw the release of Superman III.

    The troubled nature of the production would become legendary among fans, particularly with the rise of the internet in the 1990s.

    In particular, the influence of one Richard Pryor proved critical in shaping the film.

    Pryor had made no secret of his love for the Superman film series – he had gone on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson on numerous occasions and gushed over both films, stating he literally cheered at the screen while watching the previews for Superman II.

    As a result, the Salkinds, who had produced the previous Superman films and there producing Superman III, reached out to Pryor and got his involvement. Pryor was a massive star at the time, and as such, a comedic script was built around him.

    Upon receiving the script, Pryor hated it. Wanting a more serious role, and he requested that if a script was going to be built around him, it should be similar to the two Superman films he enjoyed.

    Thus, extensive re-writes were undertaken to change certain elements of the film, including the main villain – the basic premise as envisioned by Ilya Salkind would resemble his original vision – the evil supercomputer, Brainiac, would split Superman into two halves – one good and one evil, and Superman would need to contend with both Brainiac and Evil Superman.

    Brainiac would be played by veteran actor Ian Holm, whose performance as the android Ash in Alien made him perfect for the role of Brainiac. Margot Kidder’s public comments about the Salkinds put her at odds with the two producers, and her role in the film was minimised in favor of a new interest – Lana Lang, played by Annette O’Toole, who happened to love the Superman comics.

    Other elements, such as Supergirl and Mr. Mxyzptlk were removed from the script completely. Furthermore, the planned name ‘Superman vs Superman’ was changed to Superman III after producers of Kramer vs. Kramer threatened a lawsuit.

    Still, the new script had seen a shift away from the comedic tones of earlier versions, and toward something more serious.

    Everyone involved hoped this would be the right decision.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The film opens in the city of Metropolis, with Superman (Christopher Reeve) stopping an out-of-control train which threatens the lives of innocent civilians. Meanwhile, Gus Gorman (Richard Pryor) a satellite technician and computer expert, intercepts what he believes to be the transmission from an alien ship headed for Earth.

    No one believes him, so he goes to the Daily Planet where he is similarly mocked. However, he meets mild mannered reporter Clark Kent. Kent briefly interviews him to be polite, but the two get on well, as Gorman is a major fan of Superman. Clark eventually says he must cut the interview short – he must speak with his boss about securing time off to attend his high school reunion. He promises he will finish his interview with Gorman when he returns.

    Kent then goes to speak to his boss, Perry White (Jackie Cooper) and secures a visit to Smallville for himself and his friend, Jimmy Olsen (Mark Maclure). Lois Lane ( Margot Kidder) meanwhile, leaves for Bermuda.

    As Clark and Jimmy arrive in Smallville, a disaster at a chemical plant causes a fire that Superman must put out. Jimmy’s leg is injured during the incident, and he is returned to Metropolis.

    Clark Kent attends his high school reunion and re-connects with childhood friend Lana Lang (Annette O’Toole) who is now divorced. She is harassed by Brad Wilson, his former bully and her ex-husband. While visiting Lana, Superman saves Brad from being killed by a combine harvester, who apologizes to Lana. In the process, Lana figures out Clark is Superman.

    Superman and Lana have a brief, tender moment, where Superman tells her that he often struggles with balancing his two personas. But this moment is interrupted by the arrival of Brainiac (Ian Holm) in a large, skull shaped ship descending on the sky above Smallville.

    Superman flies up to the ship to confront Brainiac. The green skinned, bald alien reveals himself to be a despotic conqueror bent on collecting the knowledge and technology of every race in the universe.

    He tells refers to Superman as Kal-El, and tells him that although Earth has little value, he seeks to enslave Superman and use him as his champion in conquering other races, and to add the information of Krypton that he has already collected.

    Superman refuses, but is hit with an energy blast of Red Kryptonite – this splits Superman in two – the mild mannered, powerless Clark Kent, and an evil, uncaring, all-powerful Kal-El.

    Clark Kent is beamed back down to Earth, and Brainiac starts on his quest to absorb all the knowledge of Earth before destroying it. Brainiac’s ship eventually comes to hover over the top of Metropolis.

    This causes technology to go haywire – traffic lights flicker, missile guide systems threaten to fire, lights turn off and chaos is widespread as Brainiac takes control of Earth’s electrical items.

    Gus Gorman, with his computer expertise, is able to prevent atomic missiles from being fired for the time being, and other such catastrophic events.

    However, Evil Superman arrives in a darker costume, telling the citizens of Earth to submit to Brainiac. This causes Gorman and others to lose hope.

    Meanwhile, Clark and Lana travel to Metropolis, as Clark recalls that a man, Gus Gorman, tried to warn him about the impending arrival of Brainiac but he and many others refused to listen. He states Gorman may be their last hope. Clark also expresses frustration at his current powerless state, but Lana tells him that his strength does not come from his alien background, but is the result of the strong moral character that she has known since their childhood together in Smallville.

    Clark and Lana arrive in Metropolis, and find Gorman, who is still depressed as he believes his hero has fallen to evil. Clark tells Gorman that he doesn’t believe that the man claiming to be Superman is the real thing, and Gorman agrees.

    Gorman eventually figures out a way to block Brainiac’s signal, which is controlling most of the world’s computers and electronics, but they will need to go to the highest point in Metropolis – the Daily Planet building - to find out a way to broadcast it

    Clark, Lana and Gus make their way the Daily Planet, but are stopped by Evil Superman. Evil Superman attacks the trio, and tosses Lana from the top of the Daily Planet. This gives Clark the motivation he needs to regain his powers, and he transforms into the classic Superman costume and saves Lana just in time.

    Superman battles and defeats his evil counterpart, and then fashions the Daily Planet globe into a giant gold radar dish to deliver the signal that breaks Brainiac’s control over Earth’s electronic devices.

    Brainiac’s ship attempts to flee, but Superman catches up to it.

    Superman again faces down Brainiac, who blasts him with Red Kryptonite – this has no effect, as Superman has learned to fully accept and appreciate all aspects of his identity. Superman attempts to apprehend Brainiac, who self-destructs his ship in response, and perishes along with it.

    Superman narrowly escapes the blast, and returns to Earth, where he shakes hands with Gus Gorman and kisses Lana Lang.

    The film ends with Superman flying in the sky, as he winks to the camera and the classic theme song plays.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon release, the film performed relatively well at the box office, on a budget of $48,000,000, it made back $150,000,000.

    Critical reception was more mixed however – many critics found the villain, and the presence of a threatening, evil Superman, too scary for children. And they felt that many of the themes of duality between Clark Kent and Superman were a retread of Superman II.

    Still, the special effects were groundbreaking for the time - the miniature work and special effects used for Brainiac's skull shaped spaceship still hold up today - and performances were praised. Christopher Reeve by this point was a natural in the role, and proved he could be an effective villain when playing the Evil Superman. Anette O’Toole was commended for her chemistry with Reeve, and was a likeable love interest. Many felt Pryor’s comedic talents were wasted, but his performance was adequate and would lead to more serious roles. However, Ian Holm’s Brainiac received considerable praise – the cold, calculating, threatening performance was a stark contrast to Gene Hackman’s maniacal, greedy, and exuberant Luthor.

    In particular, his ability to convey a cold, focused evil while under considerable makeup and prosthetic work (to mimic the green, alien appearance of the Brainiac character) impressed reviewers.

    In retrospect, the film has received more praise among critics and fans alike for its the darker tones. The scene where Superman first boards Brainiac's ship is considered by many future reviewers as the highlight of the film - it employed a unique, synth based score and oozed a chilling, unsettling atmosphere which introduced the film's main villain.

    Overall, everyone involved, including Christopher Reeve, proved to be quite happy with the film in spite of its divisive standing among contemporary critics. In the aftermath in the movie's release, Reeve promised he would do one more film to complete his tenure as the Man of Steel.
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter 5
  • CHAPTER 5:​

    “Mr. President, I want to raise an issue that I think has been lurking out there for 2 or 3 weeks and cast it specifically in national security terms. You already are the oldest President in history. And some of your staff say you were tired after your most recent encounter with Mr. Mondale. I recall yet that President Kennedy had to go for days on end with very little sleep during the Cuban missile crisis. Is there any doubt in your mind that you would be able to function in such circumstances?”

    -- Henry Trewitt at the second Presidential debate October 21st 1984​

    The situation in Grenada had long been a major concern to Reagan’s White House.

    Since 1979, the small island nation was governed by Maurice Bishop, leader of the New Jewel Movement.

    The New Jewel Movement was a Marxist political party inspired, in part, by Castro’s revolution in Cuba. They came to power following the bloodless coup of the previous Prime Minister, Eric Gairy.

    Given their Marxist roots, they were absolute anathema to the Reagan White House. More than that however, they began construction on airport – to Reagan, this was unacceptable.

    The President, and other Republicans, argued that the airport would be used to transport weapons to Marxist guerrillas throughout Latin America, and would act as a forward military airbase through which the Soviet Union and Cuba could gain greater influence in the Americas.

    This was disputed by many, even inside the US. Representative Ron Dellums of California, following a fact-finding mission to Grenada, stated:

    “Based on my personal observations, discussion, and analysis of the new international airport under construction in Grenada, it is my conclusion that this project is specifically now and has always been for the purpose of economic development and is not for military use…. It is my thought that it is absurd, patronizing, and totally unwarranted for the United States government to charge that this airport poses a military threat to the United States' national security.”

    However, while debate about Grenada continued in the US, internal strife threatened to tear the small Caribbean nation apart.

    There were substantial disagreements between Prime Minister Bishop and his Deputy Prime Minister, Bernard Coard. Namely, Bishop sought rapprochement and cordial relations with the Soviet Union, while Coard sought outright affiliation.

    A military junta group, led by Hudson Austin, eventually stepped in to demand that Bishop enter a power sharing agreement with Coard, who outright refused.

    In response, Bishop was arrested. However, civil unrest and protests saw Bishop briefly escape capture, and reach out Castro and the Cuban government for assistance.

    Castro, after a brief deliberation and consultation with his brother and others in his government, decided to act.

    On October 20th, Castro sent a force of 2,500 Cuban troops, along with a detachment of ships from the Cuban Navy to help secure Bishop’s government, however, by this point, Bishop had been re-captured and executed by Grenadian soldiers.

    This put Castro in an awkward position – the military led Austin had betrayed Coard and were now operating as the Revolutionary Military Council, a dictatorial military junta. But they were still Marxist, still sought alliances with other communist countries like the USSR.

    Castro ordered the Cuban troops to make contact with the Cuban construction workers already on Grenada, and guard both their embassy and the airport they were helping build. If things could stabilize, they planned to leave the island in the coming days.

    Complicating matters further was a presence of 600 American medical students who were studying on the island. Many in the White House, and across the US, worried that the students could be killed or taken hostage during the conflict.

    To Reagan, such a thing was unacceptable, and the presence of Cuban troops made things all the more urgent. A request for help from the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States and Grenada’s Governor General Paul Scoon was all the justification he needed.

    On the 8th, Reagan gave a speech to the American public outlining the rationale for the invasion, and the goals they sought to achieve in taking military action:

    “Ladies and gentlemen, on Sunday, October 23rd, the United States received an urgent, formal request from the five member nations of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States to assist in a joint effort to restore order and democracy on the island of Grenada. Furthermore, Grenada’s Governor General, Paul Scoon, has concurred in asking for our help.

    We acceded to these requests to become part of a multinational effort with contingents from Antigua, Barbados, Dominica, Jamaica, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, and the United States. I might add that two of those, Barbados and Jamaica, are not members of the Organization, but were first approached, as we later were, by the OECS and asked to join in that undertaking. And then all of them joined unanimously in asking us to participate.

    Early this morning, forces from six Caribbean democracies and the United States began a landing or landings on the island of Grenada in the Eastern Caribbean.

    We have taken this decisive action for four reasons. First, and of overriding importance, to protect innocent lives, including up to a thousand Americans, whose personal safety is, of course, my paramount concern. Second, to forestall further chaos. And third, to assist in the restoration of conditions of law and order and of governmental institutions to the island of Grenada, where a brutal group of leftist thugs violently seized power, killing the Prime Minister, three Cabinet members, two labor leaders, and other civilians, including children.

    Worse still, Castro’s forces have also touched down in Grenada. This hostile action represents an unacceptable breach of sovereignty committed against our Caribbean neighbor, and shows clear intend by the Castro regime to militarily support the left wing coup against a democratic government on our doorstep. We must act to drive Castro’s storm troopers out of Grenada.

    Let there be no misunderstanding, this collective action has been forced on us by events that have no precedent in the eastern Caribbean and no place in any civilized society.

    American lives are at stake. We've been following the situation as closely as possible. Between 800 and a thousand Americans, including many medical students and senior citizens, make up the largest single group of foreign residents in Grenada.

    From the start we have consciously sought to calm fears. We were determined not to make an already bad situation worse and increase the risks our citizens faced. But when I received reports that a large number of our citizens were seeking to escape the island, thereby exposing themselves to great danger, and after receiving a formal request for help, a unanimous request from our neighboring states, I concluded the United States had no choice but to act strongly and decisively.

    Let me repeat, the United States objectives are clear: to protect our own citizens, to facilitate the evacuation of those who want to leave, to help in the restoration of democratic institutions in Grenada, and to drive out the Cuban invaders occupying Grenadian land.”

    Two formations of US warships took place in the invasion – the US Independence carrier group, and the and Marine Amphibious Readiness Group, which included the flagship USS Guam, the USS Barnstable County, the USS Manitowoc, the USS Fort Snelling, and the USS Trenton.

    The modest Cuban Naval forces were quickly sunk, and troops were promptly launched from the USS Guam.

    However, this is where the problems began – planning for the operation had been completely botched from the outset. Intelligence was faulty, they had to rely on inaccurate tourist maps, and mistiming of critical elements meant that the invasion began as daylight broke.

    With the element of surprise lost, the Cuban and Grenadian forces were able to prepare for the landing of American forces, obstructing runways and forcing many US forces, such as the 75th Ranger Regiment tasked with rescuing the students at Camp True Blue, to switch to a parachute landing.

    From there, things only got worse. With support from well-trained Cuban soldiers, Grenadian forces were able to stage an effective resistance against the poorly planned out US invasion.

    By the end of the first day, US forces called in an additional 3 battalions to assist in the fighting, which began to slowly turn the tide of the fighting across the island.

    When US special forces reached the True Blue Campus at St George’s University in the early hours of the next morning, they found that several Cuban soldiers had taken American students hostages, and demanded safe passage off the island.

    Fighting soon break out, and several hostages were killed in the crossfire.

    Upon hearing the news, Reagan was utterly furious.

    “Castro is going to pay for this,” Defense Secretary Clements later recalled him saying in the Situation Room.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    “My fellow Americans, this morning, it is my duty as President, and as commander-in-chief, to inform you of the tragic events that occurred a few hours ago in Grenada. As you know, yesterday we sent a select group of highly trained soldiers and marines to liberate the small Caribbean nation of Grenada and rescue several hundred American students trapped on the island.

    The students have been found, and, unfortunately, several were killed as a result of actions taken by Castro’s forces. They put our citizens, these young people, in harms way. And as a result, nine innocent Americans have lost their lives.

    We are in the process of informing the families, but make no mistake, those responsible will pay for this horrendous crime.”

    Fidel Castro immediately went into damage control. He announced to the media that he specifically instructed all Cuban troops to avoid American students, not obstruct US forces from rescuing them, and focus on defending Cuba’s embassy and the airport presently under construction. He reaffirmed that order and expressed regret over the loss of innocent lives, lamenting the rash actions of Ronald Reagan.

    The American people, however, were baying for blood, particularly the Cuban lobby who were demanding a full US invasion of Cuba, an ousting of Castro, and a new government be put in place of the current communist one.

    Reagan however, would not act until other US citizens were safe. Unbeknownst to US intelligence services, military leadership, or soldiers on the ground, there was another campus of American students located in Grand Anse, as well as several students living off campus.

    It would be another day before US Army Rangers could reach the campus and rescue the students, who were all thankfully still alive.

    Upon the evacuation of the students from the second campus, Reagan told his NSC staff, and the Joint Chiefs, that he would wait until all Americans were accounted for, before taking action against Cuba.

    It would be several days before fighting in Grenada settled down and all US civilians on the island could be accounted for. Two died in the fighting, but otherwise, all were recovered, with minor physical injuries at most.

    Despite orders not to surrender to American forces, after almost a week of fighting, several hundred Cubans surrendered to American forces en masse, realising they were conducting a losing battle on a small island they couldn’t possibly hold on to.

    The surrender, ordered by Colonel Pedro Tortoló, was a major point of shame for the Cuban military and he was vilified on his eventual return to the island. The soldiers who survived were similarly shunned, shamed or otherwise ostracized as cowards.

    The picture of Cuban troops surrendering to American forces was a major propaganda victory for the US, with Reagan complementing the “skill, bravery and professionalism of America’s men and women in uniform”. He also welcomed the defeat of Castro’s forces and promised further economic sanctions against Cuba.

    On November 1st, all major fighting in Grenada ceased and the invasion was effectively over.

    It was hoped by many that the invasion of Grenada would represent the high point of Cold War tensions in the year 1983.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There was some irony in Ronald Reagan signing legislation that would create a holiday for Martin Luther King on November 2nd, only a day after the end of major combat operations in Grenada.

    King was both an avowed socialist and pacifist, and many who knew him wondered how he would react to the Presidency of Ronald Reagan.

    Jesse Jackson had worked on behalf of Reverend King when he was a young man in college. Jackson had some idea of what he might say – Reagan’s Presidency had been the polar opposite of King’s philosophy of racial harmony, help for the sick and the downtrodden, and peace among people. Reagan had ran of racial divisiveness, looked down on the sick and downtrodden, and, for the past weeks, waged a war against black people in the Caribbean.

    But through all the misery of the past 3 years, there had been some reasons to hope – unions had come roaring back in response to Reagan’s shameful labor relations policies, people were out there organizing in numbers not seen in years, and Jackson had just led a peaceful anti-war protest of several thousand people.

    The values King fought for were still alive today, and Jackson hoped to carry them all the way to the White House.

    On November 3rd, Reverend Jesse Jackson spoke to 2,500 people in the Washington Convention Centre, and announced his candidacy for the Presidency of the United States, on the Democratic ticket:

    “'I seek the Presidency to serve the nation at a level where I can help restore a moral tone, a redemptive spirit and a sensitivity to the poor and the dispossessed of this nation,'' he said.

    He outlined the basis of his candidacy, which included a demand-oriented monetary and fiscal policies, the targeting of industrial redevelopment, extensive employment and training programs, progressive tax reform and trade policy, a “humane” immigration policy, civil rights enforcement, a military and foreign policy based on human rights, as well as robust health, education and welfare policies.

    In making this announcement, Jesse Jackson became the second African American to run for a major party’s Presidential ticket.

    There was substantial excitement for Jesse Jackson’s campaign, though the media wrote him off as a fringe candidate.

    He looked forward to proving them wrong.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fidel Castro looked proudly at the men and equipment of the Cuban Revolutionary Air and Air Defense Force.

    In the aftermath of Cuba’s embarrassing loss in Grenada, Castro sought to meet with members of his armed forces personally to lift morale. Even though many advisors were telling him to lie low for fear of another harebrained CIA assassination by Ronald Reagan, he would not show fear of a Yankee cowboy actor.

    Especially not when so many of his loyal soldiers, sailors and pilots were demoralized. Cuban forces were still fighting in Angola, so it was important to keep morale up following the shameful surrender of forces in Grenada.

    Had they chose to die as martyrs, perhaps they would be regarded as heroes. But they had sullied the People’s Revolution, and Castro felt no small amount of shame. He almost refused to welcome them back, but in the end, thought it best to allow them to return.

    For now, all he could do was meet with his men and restore their lost morale. He had been scheduled to visit the base only for a brief period in the afternoon, but had enjoyed speaking with the pilots so much, minutes turned into hours, and it was now the evening.

    So here he was, at an airfield at San Antonio de los Baños Airfield, shaking hands and giving encouragement to brave pilots, most of whom would soon be in Angola.

    “What’s your name?” Fidel asked, as he shook hands with one young pilot.

    He never heard the response. The next sound to reach his ears was a great whooshing sound from a jet.

    He barely had time to react to the sound of American planes over head…

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ronald Reagan sat behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office, as he done so many times before, and gave a televised speech to the American public. But this speech was unlike any he had delivered as President.

    “My fellow Americans, at 7 o’clock this evening, Eastern Time, United States air and naval forces carried out a series of strikes against the military installations and assets of Fidel Castro’s communist regime.

    These attacks were precisely targeted to minimize casualties among the repressed people of Cuba, with whom we have no quarrel.

    And I can also report, that during the course of these strikes, Fidel Castro, the dictator of Cuba, was killed. It was not our intention to target him, and we were unaware of his presence at the San Antonio de los Baños Airfield when we struck it.

    But all the same, he perished during the attack. We have no regrets, nor offer any apologies regarding the manner in which he died.

    He was a tyrant, who for more than two decades, conducted a reign of terror against his own people. And now, his reign has ended, and we believe Cuba and the world can work towards a new future, free of communist oppression in this hemisphere.”

    These were the opening words of Ronald Reagan’s speech announcing the air and naval assault against Cuba. As a result of this attack, not only was Fidel Castro killed, but virtually the entire Cuban Revolutionary Air Force and Navy was wiped out.

    He went on to list Castro’s crimes, and state that he hoped that this sent to a clear message by foreign nations, not to put Americans in harms way.

    He also stated that “although this mission has been accomplished” that he would “not hesitate to respond when Americans are harmed”.

    Castro’s death at the hands of the United States was met with international condemnation, and much criticism domestically.

    Many in Congress were terrified that Reagan might have begun the opening salvo of World War 3 with his attack on Cuba, which intentionally or not, killed Fidel Castro. Others claimed that Reagan had violated Gerald Ford’s Executive Order, which forbade the assassination of foreign heads of state. Officials within the Reagan White claimed that because Fidel Castro was not an intended target, it was not an “assassination”.

    Some, mostly in Florida’s Cuban community, hawkish politicians, Birchers, and the Religious Right, were pleased with the death of Castro.

    But internationally, there was universal condemnation. Even close allies of the United States, and Ronald Reagan more specifically, disapproved of the action. Most notably, Margret Thatcher was furious at Reagan’s actions, which she believed threatened nuclear war. This sentiment was echoed by many throughout the international community.

    Thatcher, as leader of a major NATO participant, the UK, requested that Able Archer be cancelled in the wake of the massively increased tensions. The Reagan White agreed to postpone Able Archer until next year.

    Later historians would recount that Thatcher’s stance in preventing Able Archer from going ahead likely saved the world from nuclear war.

    The Soviet Union was incensed that their close ally had been killed as a result of US military action. They claimed that Reagan had violated the agreement made between Kennedy and Khrushchev following the Cuban Missile Crisis and claimed that Reagan “was on a course headed for war with the Soviet Union”.

    This was a major blow to Soviet prestige, and an attack on an ally that they had long sworn to protect.

    The Soviet Union refused to take Castro’s death, and the crippling of an allied military, lying down. In a show of force and in solidarity with Cuba, Soviet Premier Yuri Andropov promised the new Cuban leader, Raul Castro, a massive effort to rebuild and resupply the small communist nation.

    Events in Cuba had nearly ended the world once, now, they threatened to do so again.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There was substantial debate in the Reagan White House over what, if anything, should be done regarding the Soviet Union’s impending naval exercise and re-supply in Cuba.

    Two camps emerged – those who argued the President should allow the Soviet to resupply Cuba, and those who argued Reagan should institute a Naval blockade around Cuba and order the Soviets to turn back, in order to gain a major PR victory.

    The former group included Vice President Bush and George Shultz, while the more hawkish group was made up of the likes of Donald Regan, Casper Weinberger, and Bill Clements.

    As per usual, Reagan sought a compromise between these two positions – he would announce that he would allow the Soviet Union to send non-military and humanitarian aide to Cuba, but there would be an embargo on dual use equipment for the foreseeable future.

    The next morning, Reagan came before the American people, in a televised address, to give yet another speech:

    “Good evening, my fellow Americans. At approximately 4:30 AM this morning, on my order, a detachment of US navy ships was sent to conduct a blockade around the communist nation of Cuba. Our mission is simple and straight forward. We seek to prevent the Soviet Union from sending military aid and offensive weapons to their satellite state off our shores.

    Soviet leaders have made plain and clear, their intentions to re-supply and re-arm their Cuban allies, so that the Castro regime, now led by Raul Castro, can continue its subversive, expansionist activities in our hemisphere.

    Then let us make this perfectly clear: We shall not allow the Soviet Union, or any other nation, to supply weapons, ammunition, spare parts, or any other dual use technology that will allow Cuba to terrorize their neighbors in this hemisphere, as they did to Grenada, and as they did to us when they killed several of our very own citizens.

    However, we shall not prevent the sending of food and medicine. Our quarrel is with the tyrannical Cuban regime, not with the oppressed peoples of that unhappy island.

    But at this critical juncture, we reserve the right to be sure that all deliveries to Cuba are humanitarian in nature, and not military. If the Soviet Union cannot accept this reasonable demand, then they have only one option – turn back now.”

    Once again, a blockade of Cuba and a stand off between the two great powers threatened to end the world. Journalists were quick to announce the start of a Second Cuban Missile Crisis.

    An American fleet was staring down a Soviet blockade, and both sides primed their atomic arsenal in the event the conflict turned hot.

    The whole world held its breath, hoping for a peaceful solution.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The reactions from Presidential hopefuls vying for the Democratic primary were universal in their concern over the current state of the world – but they all replied in their own unique way.

    The most fiery, and most outwardly critical of Reagan was the most recent entrant into the race – the Reverend Jesse Jackson.

    “At this present time, the criminal regime is not Cuba! It is Ronald Reagan’s White House! They were the ones who recklessly intervened in Grenada, bombed innocent Cubans, and broke the law by killing the leader of a foreign government! We must demand an end to current hostilities and a new friendship with Cuba and the Soviet Union, for a more peaceful world.”

    George McGovern, who had previously captured the Democratic nomination in 1972 and was running again in 1984, echoed this sentiment and called for “an end to the embargo which helped cause this whole mess”.

    “We must do as President Kennedy suggested in 1963”, McGovern continued, “We must make the world safe for diversity. Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air.”

    Colorado Senator Gary Hart, another candidate for the nomination, invoked Kennedy in a very different light.

    “President Reagan should look to the example of President Kennedy 2 decades ago,” Hart stated in an interview with the media, “That is exactly what I would do, if I were in this situation as President”. When pressed about what Kennedy did that differs from Reagan’s present actions, Hart could not give a solid answer, and then deflected.

    John Glenn cautioned against “reckless action” but stated his belief that “on balance, it is preferable that Cuba not be allowed to rearm”.

    Mondale, the most politically experienced figure in the race, and the clear frontrunner at present, took a different approach. He was aware that in a crisis, the American public were prone to rally around the flag. Coming out too strongly against Reagan could damage him just as badly as could being too quick to support the President.

    So, he decided to make himself a small target and simply stated that he had “faith that a peaceful solution can and will be reached.”

    This approach paid dividends for Mondale. In the court of public opinion, the other major candidates who spoke out strongly on the issue ended up alienating one group or another.

    Jackson and McGovern’s comments were viewed as divisive, and borderline sympathetic to the Soviet Union and Cuba. Hart’s response was seen as tone deaf and reeked of opportunism, and his inability to expand on his point when pressed proved embarrassing. Glenn, by comparison, was perceived as being too quick to support Reagan’s actions.

    For Mondale, discretion was the better part of valor. He was the only major candidate to come out of the crisis without making some gaffe on the campaign trail.

    But he only hoped that America would still be here in November of 1984. If Reagan failed to ease tensions, it would likely mean an end of civilization as they knew it.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the days dragged on, negotiations between the US, Soviet Union and Cuba stalled.

    Andropov was determined to assist Cuba in rebuilding the military that Reagan had utterly destroyed in his bombing campaign, while Reagan was utterly against the idea.

    Members of the international community, including Canada, stated they would happily mediate a solution to the current crisis, but both sides refused.

    Though Ronald Reagan promised to make regular announcements on the progress of negotiations, he began to appear less in the public eye.

    More and more, Vice President Bush, Secretaries Weinberger, and Clements, as well as Press Secretary James Brady became the public face of the administration in those tense and critical days.

    When asked why President Reagan was not facing the nation, a standard line was given about “Reagan working diligently behind the scenes to ensure a peaceful resolution”. Few believed it, even at the time.

    In truth, Reagan was perpetually exhausted in the face of such a major, dangerous crisis. He would often fall asleep in important meetings, was borderline unresponsive in the face of critical decisions, and was otherwise virtually inert past the first long night of the Second Cuban Missile Crisis.

    In truth, he simply became too exhausted to function adequately. Even a young man would struggle under the conditions, but Reagan as over 70 years of age simply could not keep up with the demands of a major international crisis which required staff to operate for days on end with precious few hours to sleep.

    Nancy Reagan was fiercely protective of her husband, and essentially ordered him to the Executive Residence to rest, away from any media spotlight. This made getting in touch with him difficult, particularly when it came time for Reagan to exercise his authority as commander-in-chief.

    It got to a point where there was talk among aides of invoking the 25th Amendment and putting authority in the hands of Vice President Bush, but it was decided that such action would be electoral suicide for 1984.

    Don Regan came up to a compromise whereby Reagan would receive a verbal list of requests as to the actions of the State Department and military moving forward, which he would agree to.

    In the Soviet Union however, they were in a remarkably similar situation. Yuri Andropov had suffered kidney failure in February of 1983, and since August he had essentially lived in the Central Clinical Hospital in western Moscow.

    He, like Reagan, was largely indisposed for much of the crisis. Aides and advisors were mostly making decision on the General Secretary’s behalf, but these decisions came about despite a massive internal struggle between warring factions inside the Soviet machine.

    At perhaps the most dangerous flashpoint in the history of the Cold War, both great nations were essentially leaderless and experiencing internal chaos at the highest levels of government.

    It was a situation that could have easily devolved into atomic warfare. But thankfully, after a week of tense negotiations, a compromise was reached.

    Food and medicine would be sent by the Soviet Union to Cuba and would be inspected by neutral third-party nations such as Canada to ensure no dual use technology was being sent. Reagan would then agree to loosen the embargo slightly as months went on and the media spotlight decreased.

    This compromise was accepted by all parties involved, but there was still substantial resentment on Cuba’s side, given that Reagan was responsible for the death of their leader.

    Still, neither the US, nor Soviets wanted to end all life on Earth over the current tensions.

    On November 10th, Reagan emerged from days of media seclusion to announce an end to the current tensions over Cuba:

    “Many in the media have taken to calling this moment of high tension the ‘Second Cuban Missile Crisis’. Well, just like the first, it ended peacefully, and with America’s national security intact. By negotiating from strength, we came to a peaceful, and just end to this week long period of increased tensions. I am confident that we can engage in further dialogue with the Soviet Union, which will see us reduce the risk of nuclear warfare between our two countries and make the world a safer place.”

    Despite Reagan’s optimistic rhetoric and triumphant tone, the public still had major questions about his performance during the crisis. His absence from the spotlight, as well as near constant leaks about his falling asleep in meetings and being whisked away by the First Lady, damaged his image as a decisive, in-control President.

    What had been a defining victory for Kennedy, had instead fueled doubts about Reagan’s ability. He saw only a very modest bump in the polls from the resolution of this crisis, and Americans were divided as to whether the whole affair should have been avoided to begin with.

    Still, the apocalypse was averted. The world could stop holding its breath, and the United States could return to a state of relative normality.

    With the first Democratic primaries around the corner, the race to the White House in 1984 was about to begin in earnest.
     
    Last edited:
    The Mega Fight: Marvelous Marvin Hagler vs Sugar Ray Leonard in 1983
  • The Mega Fight: Marvelous Marvin Hagler vs Sugar Ray Leonard

    On November 10th, 1983, one of the most lucrative and anticipated boxing matches of all time took place – a Middleweight showdown between undisputed champion Marvelous Marvin Hagler and the golden boy of the sport, Sugar Ray Leonard.

    There were genuine questions if the fight would ever happen again, as a detached retina suffered by Leonard in the middle of 1982 put his career in jeopardy. However, following surgery and a diagnosis of a full recovery, Leonard announced at a charity event in November of 1982 that his career would continue, and that he would look forward to fighting Aaron “The Hawk” Pryor and “Marvelous” Marvin Hagler in the coming year.

    Leonard’s fight against Pryor was highly anticipated by many.

    Pyor was the reigning WBA and Ring Magazine light welterweight champion, riding a streak of 25 knockout victories in a row and defeating very well-regarded opposition like Antonio Cervantes and Alexis Argüello.

    However, he was a champion of the 140lb weight class, and Leonard was much larger, having fought as high as light middleweight - 154 pounds – and possessing a 3-inch advantage in height and a 1-and-a-half-inch reach advantage.

    The two men had sparred frequently while on the same 1976 Olympic team (Pryor was an alternate, Leonard won gold) and this was a major part of the build up to their April 1983 professional showdown.

    Accounts of those sparring matches ranged from Pryor knocking Leonard down, to Ray styling on “The Hawk”. Others suggested that Leonard and Pryor’s sparring matches were competitive chess matches.

    The public was eager to see how the fight would play out. Adding to the excitement was Aaron Pryor’s public persona as a rough and tough fighter. As a later manager would recount, Pryor was the sort of fighter that “would take your best shot, spit in your eye and then kick your ass!”

    While there was no spitting by Pryor, he certainly hyped up the fight as best he could, calling Leonard “a pampered golden boy”, “a media hype” and claiming, “I’ll knock you out like I did in sparring”. He had a famous chant, where he would say “What time is it?” and his entourage would respond “Hawk Time!”

    Leonard was no stranger to mental warfare, which had been used so effectively against him by Duran, who would go on to beat him in their first fight before Leonard avenged the loss in the classic “No Mas” bout.

    “Everybody talks, but it only matters what you can do on the night,” he said calmly while talking to the media.

    The night of the fight came and the crowd was electric. Big fight energy was in the air.

    While most in the crowd cheered for Leonard, there were more than a few men with “Hawk Time!” shirts on in the stands.

    Both men walked to into the ring. Their names were announced. The bell rang and they met in the middle.

    Pryor came out aggressive, swinging for the bleachers with every punch in the book – a torrent of straights, uppercuts, hooks – which sent Leonard reeling back from the torrent coming at him. Leonard attempted to settle his opponent down with jabs, but Pryor was bobbing and weaving towards him throwing wild combinations.

    Most of the first round saw Leonard moving backwards as Pryor advanced with incredible pace, rhythm, and pressure. But neither fighter landed any telling or damaging blows.

    In the second round however, the first decisive blow of the fight would be scored – and it was thrown by Pryor. A wild overhand right by Leonard caught him on the point of the chin, buckling his knees and forcing Leonard to shell up along the ropes as Pryor teed off. Leonard would spend several seconds being teed off on, before managing to grab a clinch and reset.

    He spent the rest of the round tentatively boxing while Pryor continued his dance of perpetual motion.

    Leonard went back to his stool, where an irate Angelo Dundee (the same man famous for training Ali) berated him.

    “What are you doing? You’re letting this little guy beat on you! Get back in there and take it to him!”

    Dundee’s provocation woke Leonard up, as it had late against Hearns, and Leonard came out with a new resolve to meet Pryor in the middle of the ring and trade.

    It was in this round that fans were treated to Leonard at his offensive best – stunning, sizzling fast combinations snapped and jerked Pryor’s head around as Leonard opened the round with a flurry as only he could.

    The two men exchanged leather in the center of the ring, neither taking a step back. But it was Pryor who was getting the worst of it, by far. Leonard was simply bigger, faster, and hit harder.

    Towards the end of the round, Leonard landed 3 flush hooks in a row that dropped Pryor to the canvas. He arose at the count of 8, but was hurt. Leonard pounced on him, landing a series of punches as Pryor did all he could to hang on.

    The bell rang and Pryor had survived the round, but was badly hurt.

    Round 4 began, with Pryor much more hesitant to throw punches. Leonard, having gained the respect of his man, was far more content to box and pick away at the challenger.

    He jabbed away at Pryor, occasionally opening with left hooks and uppercuts where he could. Pryor landed little in the way of offense, he could only move forward and get picked apart.

    Round 4 ended, mercifully for The Hawk, and the referee warned the corner that he would stop the fight if Pryor had another bad round like that.

    Leonard came out in round 5 and showed more of the offensive talent he was known for. Pundits used phrases like poetry in motion to describe Leonard, and that praise was more than deserved – Leonard threw combinations against Pryor that looked effortlessly fluid, but which battered Pryor’s face into a bruised and bloody mass.

    The 5th round was even less competitive than the last, though Pryor’s grit and determination saw him refused to be knocked down despite several close calls. Shortly after going back to his corner, the referee stopped the fight.

    Sugar Ray Leonard had won. In his post-fight comments, Leonard commended Pryor for his heart, toughness, and skills, but stated “I was the bigger man and I believe that had a lot to do with the fight going the way it did. But Aaron Pryor was a dangerous opponent and I have nothing but respect for him.”

    Once that was out of the way, he was ready to set up his next big money bout.

    Marvelous Marvin Hagler would meet him in the ring for a stare down and a brief exchange of words. Both men were professionals and respected the sport and themselves – there would no shoving or exaggerated theatrics.

    Just two modern gladiators, two legends of the sport, eager for a showdown that prove to be one of the biggest in boxing history.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If Leonard was the media darling of boxing, then Hagler was perhaps the exact opposite – a workhorse, long underappreciated fighter who had to toil away in obscurity before reaching the top.

    From the very beginning, Hagler was told he had three things going against him - “You’re black, left-handed and good.”

    But he fought on regardless, and eventually earned his way to a title shot against Vito Antuofermo in 1979, which ended in a very controversial draw that many felt Hagler deserved to win.

    The title would change hands the following year when British middleweight Alan Minter defeated Antuofermo for the crown.

    In September of 1980, Hagler would have his chance to become a champion again, this time against Minter at Wembley Arena in London, England.

    The build up to the fight was notorious for the racial animosity stirred up by Minter, who stated that he “did not intend to lose his title to a black man”, to which Hagler responded that Minter would “pay for saying that when we meet at Wembley."

    The two fight-camps squabbled over minor details like beards and the use of substances to treat cuts other than other than one part water to 1,000 parts adrenaline.

    This created a toxic environment leading up the fight, and the drunk hometown crowd was rapidly pro-Minter on the night of the bout.

    When Marvellous Marvin Hagler defeated Minter in the third round after he was deemed unable to continue following several bad cuts to his face, the new champion did not get to savor the victory. Instead, bottles, chairs and other projectiles were launched into the ring at Hagler and his team, who had to flee. The rabid crowd harassed Hagler fans, destroying the banners and signs of any pro-Hagler attendees.

    The Minter-Hagler fight would go down as one of boxing’s lowest moments and robbed Hagler of what should have been the happiest night of his professional life.

    Not even a string of 7 straight title defenses, all by knockout, could erase the memory of that night.

    Hagler needed to beat Ray Leonard to validate a career spent toiling in obscurity, never getting the respect he deserved. To Marvelous Marvin, Sugar Ray was his opposite – someone granted every opportunity as a result of a shining smile and careful marketing.

    But that wasn’t a fair assessment, Sugar Ray Leonard had more than proved himself as one of the best active fighters in boxing.

    All the same, Hagler chastised Ray as someone who “struggled against a little guy in his last fight”, while Leonard derided Hagler as being “a brawler and a bully in the ring”.

    For as much intensity existed between the two men, and whatever they said in public, neither underestimated the other in private. But even without the traditional bad blood which could fuel boxing rivalries, the public was ecstatic about this fight – these were two of the best fighters in the world meeting in their primes for all the glory.

    Leonard made a media skeptical of the build-up, doing regular, intense public workouts while Hagler isolated himself for weeks up until the fight, training out of abandoned motels at Cape Code and running miles at 5 AM every morning in old army boots.

    They were two very different boxers with two very different styles and personas – and who would win was the hottest question in boxing.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 26th, 1983, Marvelous Marvin Hagler and Sugar Ray Leonard met in the ring.

    The atmosphere inside The Boardwalk Hall in Atlantic City was nothing short of electric and even the hottest A-list celebrities struggled to get tickets. The likes of Jack Nicholson, Christopher Reeves, Tom Cruise, Muhammad Ali, Matthew Broderick, Chevy Chase, and more all attended the fight and it was the highest earning box office gate in boxing’s history. Ronald Reagan himself watched on a closed-circuit broadcast from the White House, and a phone installed in the dressing rooms of both men to talk to the winner.

    Leonard walked out first, wearing white shorts with blue trim. He had bulked up for his fight, having moved up from the welterweight limit of 147 pounds, to weighting in at 159lbs, one below the middleweight limit. The commentators note that Leonard looks somewhat nervous going into the ring, but in such a high-profile fight this is not especially unusual.

    Marvelous Marvin Hagler walked out to the ring next, as was customary for a champion. He wore crimson shorts with white trim. His iconic bald head, ice cold demeanor and rock-hard physique were all on display as he calmly walked to the ring and took off his hooded robe. For a man who was regularly in prime physical form, he’d seemingly outdone himself this time – he looked like he had been carved out of stone.

    The two men stared each other down, not breaking eye contact even as they touched gloves. The crowd roared in anticipation.

    The two went back to their corners, the bell rang, the world held its breath…

    Round 1 began. Leonard danced out to the middle of the ring, while Hagler marched forward, determined to validate a career of struggles by beating Ray Leonard.

    To the shock of everyone present, including Hagler himself, in a microsecond, Ray Leonard switched from dancing to planting his feet and swinging with a blistering combination that stung the Marvelous One. But punches bounced off Hagler like bullets bounced off Superman.

    Being the gladiator he was, Hagler swung back with a left hook that buzzed over Leonard’s head as he ducked. The two men fell into a clinch.

    To the surprise of many, Hagler could not bully or easily shove Ray around the ring when the two got chest to chest. Leonard tied up Marvellous Marvin’s hands, preventing the champion from getting off any offense at all.

    As a southpaw fighter, Hagler’s shoulder was in the way of Leonard’s jab, which made it far more difficult for one of Leonard’s best punches to land. However, Hagler could also right orthodox, which was the traditional right-handed method of fighting which was far more common in boxing and he would often switch stances mid-jab.

    When the referee separated the two, Leonard again went right back to brawling with Hagler, who responded in kind. Leonard flurried, while Hagler timed a stiff jab that stung Ray and gave him pause. As Leonard reset in response to the stiff punch, Hagler put his left foot forward, switching orthodox and threw a two-handed combination of alternate left and right hooks that forced Leonard back even further, so his back touched the ropes.

    However, Leonard was incredibly fleet footed, and danced away to the side, avoiding Hagler’s follow up punches and pivoting 180 degrees back to the centre of the ring.

    Hagler remained in orthodox, and Leonard, now able to jab Hagler more effectively, did so, stinging at Hagler’s eyes and darting out of the way of a jab, before throwing a hook to the body. Hagler did not so much as grimace in response, but it scored points.

    Leonard threw another jab, and Hagler slipped it and threw a wide hook to the body that Leonard blocked with his elbow. The two men were in the middle of the ring yet again, and Leonard again chose to stop dancing and start brawling, which Hagler was more than happy to oblige.

    While Leonard landed more punches, Hagler’s blows were the harder of the two, knocking Leonard on his heels when he could connect and whipping his head around. Leonard was forced to back off following a hard hook to the ribs, and Hagler gave chase as the round ended.

    A brawl was not what pundits were expecting, but it drove the fans into a frenzy. The first round ended, and all three judges gave it to Hagler.

    Leonard got back to his corner, and Dundee chastised him saying: “You gave away that round by fighting his fight. Stick to the game plan.”

    Goody Petronelli, Hagler’s trainer was far happier with his fighter’s performance.

    “Excellent, champ,” he said, “You’re too strong for him. Go to the body and break him down.”

    In truth, Leonard had allowed his ego to get the better of him, seeking to prove wrong everyone who said he was too small for Hagler and that he could not stand toe-to-toe. While he had made a commendable effort, he realized that there was nothing to gain from fighting to his opponents’ strengths.

    So, he changed tactics.

    Leonard moved to the centre of the ring, but rather than exploding with a combination, he allowed Hagler to come to him. Hagler threw a left cross, Leonard gave ground momentarily and sprang back into range with a right straight, followed by two hooks and uppercut, all blindly fast.

    While Leonard had lost the first round, he gained some important knowledge – namely, for as fearsome as Hagler’s reputation, he was not the one-punch destroyer many assumed he was. His best punch by far was a lead right hook from southpaw, and every other punch in his arsenal was to distract from that punch. As such, Sugar Ray moved constantly away from Hagler’s right hand, giving up ground when Hagler attacked and moving in with combinations to chip away and score points against the champion.

    It was a strategy which clearly worked, and Leonard began to dominate at mid and long range. However, when the two got together, Hagler began to work to free his hands and hammer away at Leonard to the body with short punches. They were not devastating blows by any stretch, but they would wear Leonard down if he did nothing about them.

    Leonard’s response was to shove Hagler away and flurry with punches to the head, in order to even out the exchanges. This gave Leonard the space and time he needed to disengage from the clinch and dance away, inviting Hagler to close the distance and then stinging him whenever he tried to get in close. Leonard was aided by a larger 22-by-22-foot ring, which he insisted be used instead of the smaller ring.

    He danced around and peppered Hagler with shots all through the second round. But Hagler was one of the toughest men to ever box, never being knocked down, let alone out, in all of his fights. None of Leonard’s blows damaged Hagler, but they were scoring points which is exactly what the challenger was aiming to do.

    Round 2 ended, and the round was clearly Leonard’s.

    Round 3 began, and Leonard looked to dance and pot-shot Hagler, who began to follow Leonard around the ring and walk into punches. He marched forward, attempting to use every punch in his arsenal to catch Leonard, who expertly slipped and dodged them.

    Hagler attempted to switch again to orthodox in an attempt to confuse Leonard, but this made it easier for Leonard’s cobra-like jab to find Hagler’s bearded chin.

    The one bright spot of Hagler’s offense was still the clinch, but Leonard’s fast feet and deft movement made it harder and harder for Hagler to get into close range. Leonard’s confidence grew, and he began to shuffle his feet the way Ali had done in his prime, before letting rip with sizzling combinations.

    Towards the end of the round, Leonard wound his ring arm up as if to throw a punch, and then threw a left jab which snapped Hagler’s head back. This was the same trick Leonard had used against Duran to embarrass him, and Hagler similarly felt the sting as the crowd laughed.

    The bell rang to end the round, Leonard rose his arms in triumph. Hagler went back to his stool feeling dejected. But Hagler’s spirit was not so easily broken. In the time between round 3 and 4, Hagler and his trainers devised a new way to close the distance against Leonard.

    Leonard had success in allowing Hagler to walk forward towards him, and then using his superior speed to get off first with point scoring punches before retreating to a safe distance. So Hagler decided he needed to find a way to close distance faster.

    His solution was to essentially leap forward from outside of Leonard’s range into a powerful jab. This was his opening gambit in round 4, and it worked beautifully. Leonard was shocked by the distance Hagler could cover so quickly, and his head was jerked back by the force of the punch.

    This allowed Hagler to get in close range, and land strong punches to Leonard’s sternum. This specialised jab did much to solve Hagler’s struggles at Leonard from range, as Leonard could no longer rely on Marvin to walk forward into his counter punches. Leonard had to give up more and more ground to get away from Hagler, and regularly round himself on the very edges of the ring.

    Leonard attempted to clinch up with Hagler, who began sneaking in strong uppercuts to the sternum which created the space necessary for Hagler break Leonard’s grip and throw combinations while Leonard was pinned against the ropes.

    Sugar Ray, with his back literally against the wall, did what all great fighters do when they are pressured. He fought back with everything he had, throwing a vicious combination against Hagler, which served to halt the champion’s assault.

    As soon as Ray felt an opening, he darted away and moved back to the centre of the ring. But Hagler’s shifting gazelle jab continued to bedevil Ray for the rest of the round.

    Hagler’s big moment with Ray against the ropes, and the success of his new jab technique gave him a clear victory in that round.

    Round 5 began, and now it was Leonard’s initiative which saw him counter Hagler’s new tactic. Hagler again leapt in with his jab, and Leonard ducked low and responded with a punch to the body when Hagler jumped in to close the distance. However, the leaping motion would still put Hagler uncomfortably close to Leonard even if the champion ate a body blow for his troubles. Rather than attempt to hold, Leonard would then shove Hagler away when the two were in close and then use his footwork to pivot away from danger.

    It was a brilliant and effective strategy, and Hagler was forced to box again at the distance of Leonard’s choosing. Leonard was able to effectively force Hagler into committing to punch, move out of the way of the champion’s offense and rip him with hard counters.

    Round 5 ended, and with it, the first Act of this 15-round battle of gladiators. All three judges had Leonard up 3 rounds to 2.

    The two men come out to fight for round 6.

    Hagler starts the fight orthodox and eats a few jabs from Leonard. The Marvelous One merely walks through them however and responds with a jab of his own. Again, Leonard had quantity, Hagler has quality.

    Leonard threw out another jab, but this time, Hagler went over the top with an overhand right which cracked Leonard square on the jaw and buckled his legs. It was by far the most impactful punch of the fight, and Leonard is forced to shell up against the ropes as Hagler bangs away on him.

    Leonard composed himself and began dancing again, but remained on the defensive for the entire round, slipping punches and avoiding damage, hoping to recover enough to reset in the 7th. Despite Hagler’s offensive firepower, Leonard stayed calm and did everything he had to do to make it out of the round and prevent himself from being knocked down, or worse, knocked out.

    A clear Hagler round, but Leonard felt glad just to have survived.

    Hagler continued his strong momentum in the 7th. Recognizing that Leonard was extremely difficult to hit in the head, Hagler began following up his jabs with vicious lefts to the body which sapped Leonard’s strength bit by bit. Leonard did enough to stay in the fight and avoid any major knock out punches, but he was beginning to neglect offense, falling behind as a result.

    Leonard seemed to recover more in the 8th, showing more pep in his step and throwing the combinations that wowed the judges and made the crowd cheer. He began expertly doubling up punches on either side, having no consistent rhythm to his combos which made it almost impossible for Hagler to block them all completely. Hagler seemed to take the round off and allowed Ray to steal it.

    Round 9 began with Hagler probing with his jab, but Leonard now had a means by which to counter it. He would throw a jab, and leave his arm extended to block the path of Hagler’s punch to frustrate him. This proved an effective strategy, and Hagler grew angry, abandoning his masterful boxing strategy and resorting instead to throwing wild hooks and punches in an attempt to knock Ray Leonard out. Ray was able to avoid these and pick away at Hagler.

    Ray no longer had the stamina to waste on an Ali-style shuffle, but his confidence was growing once again. He began throwing jabs would he would then convert into a cupped arm around the back of Hagler’s head, yanking his head down into uppercuts which seemed to get Hagler’s attention.

    Round 9 clearly belonged to Leonard and proved to be one of his best of the fight.

    Hagler, extremely frustrated and desiring a knockout against Ray, decided simply to march through Leonard’s offense in the 10th and deliver punishing body blows. Leonard, growing exhausted, was not able to dance away as effectively as he had previously, and this produced one of the closest rounds of the fight. Hagler would push Ray into the corner or against the ropes and work away to the body and the head, until Ray would find the strength to flurry his way out and reset to the middle of the ring.

    Hagler was calmed down his trainers after round 10, and adopted a more scientific approach to round 11. He showed his defensive acumen, slipping Leonard’s flurries or blocking them behind his gloves, and then responding with flurries of his own, always ending with a hard hook to the body. Now, Leonard was fading and Hagler was coming on strong. The punch stats for round 11 favoured Hagler by a significant margin.

    Round 12 began, and seemed to mirror the 11th, until the last 40 seconds Leonard landed a picture-perfect right uppercut, followed by left hook and then following up by firing a right cross that caught Hagler right on the point of the chin. Hagler stepped back and initiated a clinch for the first time in the fight, clearly buzzed by Leonard’s attack. Sensing blood, Leonard shoved his opponent away and uncorked an insane 15 punch combination that Hagler was forced to shell up from.

    Hagler recovered quickly, as always, and attempted to retaliate with an offensive barrage of his own, but Leonard retreated, avoiding them all. As the clapper went off signalling the last 10 seconds of the round, Leonard did a quick shuffle of his feet and flurried once again – the vast majority of these final punches missed, but it put an exclamation point on the round, and all 3 judges scored it for Leonard.

    A reinvigorated Leonard came out aggressively in the 13th, looking to score early, but Hagler came prepared. He waded through Leonard’s flurry and crashed into the clinch, before shaving Leonard away to create space and uncorking a sublime uppercut which caught Leonard square under the jaw. Leonard stumbled badly, having to grab onto Hagler’s arms and cling for dear life to avoid hitting the canvas.

    With both men tiring, Hagler used his superior strength and size to bully Leonard around the ring, pushing him into the corner and against the ropes to land combinations. Leonard did all he could to survive, before exploding in the final 30 seconds into a flurry in an attempt to steal the round. It didn’t work, the round clearly belonged to Hagler. All Leonard could have hoped for was that it was not scored a 10-8.

    Both men were exhausted come the 14th, with Leonard actively walking himself to the ropes just to hold himself up, and Hagler’s once crisp hard offense being reduced to slow, sloppy swings. Ray would save himself for short bursts of explosive, high catching punch combinations while Hagler was doing more consistent work through the rounds, which made for a close penultimate round.

    As the 15th round began, the end of the fight was within view, and both men rallied as a result. Leonard began the round with a flurry and then retreated for much of the rest of it, until the final 30 seconds when his corner yelled “30 seconds, Ray!”

    However, for the rest of the middle portion of the round, it was Hagler chasing down Ray and throwing punches. While Leonard avoided many of these, he no longer had the stamina to dodge as effectively and would inevitably get hit with every 4th or 5th punch in Hagler’s combinations.

    But with 30 seconds to go, Leonard came alive again and put everything he had into one final flurry. Sugar Ray clinched and ran out the clock for the last 10 seconds. The bell rang.

    The fight was over. Both men raised their arms in victory.

    It was in the judges’ hands now. It was a close fight, and it was anyone’s guess who had won it.

    The judges scores were tallied.

    The first judge scored it 143 to 142 for…Leonard.

    The second judge scored it 143 to 142 for…Hagler

    The third scored it 143 to 142 for the winner…by split decision…

    And still the undisputed middleweight champion of the world – Marvelous Marvin Hagler!

    Hagler had done it. He’d beaten the biggest star in the sport. Round 10 and 15 proved to be the swing rounds, around which the fight was decided. Leonard needed to win both these close rounds to have the fight scored his way, while Hagler only needed one of either.

    Hagler’s camp erupted, but the man himself looked stoic, as though he had expected victory all along. Ray was classy in defeat, calling Hagler a “great champion” but saying he’d be back to fight again and it “wasn’t my night tonight”. Hagler gave similar credit to Leonard, calling him “a great fighter” but saying that with this victory, “I’ve earned my respect”.

    With this fight, Hagler got what he wanted – A-list celebrities came to him after the bout, asking for Polaroids. He got a phone call from the President of the United States. He got his multi-million-dollar payday.

    Leonard went into seclusion following the fight, retreating to an island getaway to get away from the media – while he had gotten the bigger payday as the bigger star, this meant very little. He felt the sting of defeat once again. He’d have to live with it at least until he got his rematch.

    Both men were determined to fight on – Hagler, to take advantage of this new fame, and Leonard, to wash the stain of defeat from his legacy.
     
    Last edited:
    Pop Culture Update: Octopussy and James Bond of the Secret Service
  • Pop Culture Update: Octopussy and James Bond of the Secret Service

    bond vs bond.png


    1983 saw something unprecedented in the world of film – two James Bond features in a single year, produced by rival companies.

    This came about as a result of a copyright dispute between Ian Fleming and Kevin McClory, who collaborated with Fleming in the late 1950s to produce a script for what would become Thunderball.

    Fleming later tried to remove McClory’s involvement, and the Irish writer and producer sued him. As a result of the lawsuit, and the subsequent settlement, McClory had the legal rights to produce a film based on the Thunderball film, and the rights to Blofeld and the SPECTRE organisation.

    In 1983, he was finally ready to create that film.

    He had initially asked Sean Connery to return to the character for his production. Connery seriously considered the offer, but refused, stating that “never again means never again”.

    So McClory and producer Jack Schwartzman began looking at alternatives. Their first thought was to look at actors considered for Bond but rejected by Cubby Broccoli – namely, Timothy Dalton, Patrick Mower, Michael Jayston, Lewis Collins and James Brolin.

    Dalton was the first choice of McClory but declined to appear in the unofficial Bond picture. Brolin impressed with his audition and interview but was ruled out for being American.

    However, Collins impressed McClory and Schwartzman both with the intensity of his audition and with his background. In truth, he was Schwartzman’s first choice from the beginning, and McClory was eventually convinced that Collins was the man they were looking for.

    Collins was viewed by Cubby Broccoli as “too aggressive” for the part, but it inspired McClory and Schwartzman to take the character in a new direction – one that was sleeker, edgier, and darker in comparison to the increasingly campy Moore films. The script was heavily edited to reflect this.

    Collins was trusted to do many of his own stunts, given his background as a paratrooper and his numerous hobbies including jujitsu, karate, parachuting, motorbiking, and parachuting. The British media praised the choice, as Collins was a popular actor in the crime-action drama The Professionals. In it, he played Bodie, a hard edged English detective. He also played a similarly hard man SAS character in the film Who Dares Wins which was very much enjoyed by the Reagan White House.

    The sleeker, more modern tone of James Bond of the Secret Service was also reflected in who they choose to conduct the official theme for the picture – Phil Collins of the rock band Genesis.

    The difference between the tough, hardman image of Collins and the charming, tongue-in-cheek persona of Moore drew substantial attention in the lead up to the release of the two opposing Bond films – Eon Production’s Octopussy and Taliafilm’s James Bond of the Secret Service.

    The release of Octopussy confirmed the fears of many, and saw critics mock it as “a venture into self-parody”, “formulaic”, “anachronistic”, and “overly long and confusing”. The campy nature of the film, which saw Bond swing through trees while making Tarzan-esque cries, hide inside a gorilla suit, and wear a clown suit were viewed as low points of the movie.

    Shortly after release of the film, Moore announced that he was retiring from the role of Bond, to give way for a younger actor. Gracious as always, he stated he had “no regrets” about his time in the role, but that it was “time for a new generation and a new direction in the franchise.”

    With the disappointment that was Octopussy, the public were more eager for a younger, fresher, and more exciting interaction of the character.

    They could only hope that James Bond of the Secret Service would deliver. And Collins himself was eager to please audiences.

    This created some tension behind the scenes, as Collins began to take issue with the script, and with scenes such as the Domination scene. He famously declared “I’m not doing any video game shit!” to director Irvin Kershner.

    Several team members of the writing team from The Professionals would eventually be brought in to hammer out a more serious script, though a certain amount of campy Bond flair was left in.

    Whether the finished product could be successful was a question for audience and critics.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The film begins with a screen full of 007 symbols which gradually disappear to reveal our opening scene. James Bond (Lewis Collins) is on a mission to rescue a kidnapped young girl, the daughter of a prominent British politician. She is held up in the in an old, dilapidated mansion by terrorists in the English countryside. Bond is looking at the house through binoculars while corresponding with M (Tony Britton), who instructs Bond to wait for backup. However, Bond sees them preparing to execute the girl and jumps into action.

    He kicks in the door, shooting and beating his way through the terrorists until he gets to where the girl is as Phil Collins’ song “Dangerous Man” played over the action. The song fades out as Bond confronts the final terrorist, who’s holding the young girl hostage with one hand, and a detonator in the other. The whole building is lined with explosives.

    He tells Bond to drop his gun, and Bond appears to do so, but this was a ruse. He quickly raises his gun and shoots the terrorist leader, just over the girl’s shoulder. Bond secures the hostage, but the terrorist leader is still alive. He detonates the explosives, and Bond shields the girl with his body.

    Bond’s backup arrives and inspects the wreckage. A wounded Bond emerges from the wreckage, holding the young girl who is crying and with minor injuries, but very much alive.

    We then see Bond at M16 headquarters, still nursing the wounds from his latest mission. He flirts with a deeply concerned Moneypenny (Sarah Douglas) before being chewed out by M (Tony Britton) who tells Bond that he acted out of line by going in alone during his last mission. M goes on to explain how it took all his political pull to prevent Bond from being dismissed and potentially even prosecuted for endangering the family member of a powerful elected official.

    Bond scoffs at M, who orders Bond to spend some time “getting himself in order” at a health retreat outside of London. M gives Bond an ultimatum – recuperate or be dismissed from Her Majesty’s Secret Service.

    Bond reluctantly agrees and attends the Shrublands Health Farm. While there, Bond has a dalliance with Patricia Jones (Barbara Carrera), a nurse, and sees a mysterious heavily bandaged up man who is whisked away the staff.

    Bond goes to investigate further, but is jabbed with a needle by Fearing, which knocks him out. He wakes up strapped to a hospital gurney, with Jones revealing her real name - Fatima Blush.

    Blush tells Bond her intentions – to brainwash and bring Bond under the command of the organisation she works for – SPECTRE. She commands her top henchman, Lippe (Pat Roach), to oversee the brainwashing while she sees to the next stage of SPECTRE’s plan.

    Meanwhile, the bandaged man is revealed to be Jack Petachi (Gavan O'Herlihy), who has been surgically altered to resemble a NATO pilot who has been quietly terminated by SPECTRE. Petachi, on the orders of SPECTRE, replaces the NATO pilot on a flight and steals two AGM-86B cruise missiles with live nuclear warheads. Blush then has Petachi shot and killed to cover SPECTRE’s tracks.

    Bond is tortured and brainwashed and feigns loyalty to SPECTRE to get released. Upon being freed from confinement, he immediately kills Lippi, fights the thugs, and escapes Shrublands.

    Blush meets with the leader of the SPECTRE – Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Max Von Sandow) who tells her to contact Maximillian Largo (Klaus Maria Brandauer) his top lieutenant and hand over the nuclear weapons to him for safe keeping. Blofeld then gives an ultimatum to the UN – give SPECTRE $1 billion within 72 hours or two cities will be destroyed – one in the United Kingdom and the other in the United States.

    Meanwhile, Bond returns to MI6, and meets with M (Edward Fox) and Q (Rowan Atkinson) who gives him his assignment and gadgets – track down and recover the nuclear weapons. They give him his first lead - Domino Petachi (Kim Bassinger) the lover of Largo, was also the sister of the SPECTRE operative slain by Blush.

    Bond tracks Largo and Petachi to Madrid, Spain. Meeting with his CIA contact, Felix Leiter (Bernie Casey) and a local Spanish agent Isabella (Victoria Abril). Leiter directs Bond to a party at Lago’s Madrid mansion, and leaves, after which Bond seduces Isabella and the two spend the night together.

    Later, Bond attends under an assumed identity of Bonar Thomas, a champion poker player. Lago, wanting to test his gambling skills against a supposed world class player, challenges Bond – Bond wins, and requests a dance with Domino.

    During their dance, Bond informs Domino that her brother was killed at the behest of SPECTRE. The two agree to meet later to discuss how to stop SPECTRE but are observed by another attendee - Fatima Blush.

    Blush recognises Bond and informs Lago of Bond’s true identity. Bond leaves the party on his Q branch motorcycle but is pursued by Lago’s men. Bond deploys a smoke screen and oil slick to ward off his pursuers and returns to his villa.

    Upon returning to his villa, he finds Isabella dead. He is ambushed by Largo’s men and captured.

    Bond is brought back to Largo’s villa. There, is hooked up to electrodes which shock him when he refuses to give up any information. Domino is forced to watch in horror as Bond is tortured. That evening, a sympathetic Domino frees Bond and offers to help him take down SPECTRE. Bond gives her a Q-branch tracking device and tells her to go along with Largo’s plan while he gets backup. The two kiss before parting ways.

    Bond escapes Largo’s compound and meets up once again with Felix Leiter. Domino’s tracking device is traced to Newfoundland, an island just off the North American mainland.

    Bond, Leiter and a group of American and British special forces conduct an underwater raid on Largo’s ship – The Flying Saucer - which is fitted with two specially designed missile launchers which are capable of striking two targets simultaneously – London and New York.

    While Leiter and the Americans fight Largo’s men, Bond boards The Flying Saucer and quickly finds both Largo and Blush. Largo reveals that he found the tracker on Domino’s person and reveals that she’s being kept imprisoned below deck.

    Bond incapacitates Lago before moving to shoot Blush, only to find himself physically incapable of doing so – the programming he received earlier makes him unable to take any action to harm her.

    Blush then reveals she intends to use the atomic missiles anyway to destroy both New York and London. She explains that she was the product of a dalliance between an Argentinian woman and a Nazi officer who fled to Buenos Aires following the war. Though both her parents are now dead, she seeks to destroy the West in the memory of her late, Nazi father.

    Largo objects, claiming that she’s disobeying Blofeld’s orders by attacking before the end of the deadline – Blush shoots him dead. She prepares to finish off Bond but is shot in the back up with a speargun by Domino, who avenges her brother’s death.

    Bond then prevents the missiles from firing, saving the day.

    We then see Bond in Quebec, where he receives a phone call from M, thanking Bond for his actions and requesting he returns to London to receive an award for his actions.

    Bond declines, stating that he “hasn’t finished his R&R”, as the camera pans out to see Domino in the bed behind him. He then hangs up and embraces Domino to end the film.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon release, James Bond of the Secret Service was well received by critics who were particularly complementary of Collins as Bond. In comparison to the aging Moore, Collins offered audiences a Bond who was more aggressive, more vulnerable and more intense than they’d seen in the campier Moore films, without completely losing the charm or charisma that audiences had come to enjoy.

    While it did not quite match Octopussy’s box office numbers, it proved to be far more popular with critics and long-time fans and proved to be a major success in the video rental market both in the UK and United States.

    The success of McClory’s film gave him inspiration to pursue a sequel and continue on the darker interpretation of Bond that audiences had resonated with. Collins agreed and went one further – he wanted to help pen the script.

    Thus, the impetus for the sequel, S.P.E.C.T.R.E was born. Meanwhile, EON was busy at work putting together their next Bond film – From A View To a Kill.

    The Battle of the Bonds would continue.
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter 6
  • CHAPTER 6:​

    “When I was a young man, I used to dream maybe someday I could be an alderman. Instead of that I became an attorney general, a senator, a vice president, a Democratic nominee.”

    -- Walter Mondale IOTL reflecting on his career​

    On January 7th, 1984, the toxic culture inside the Reagan White House had claimed yet another victim. The influential National Security Advisor, William P. Clark, submitted his letter of resignation to Ronald Reagan citing a desire to spend more time with family.

    In truth, his departure was the result of months of explicit hostility from a clique formed by Bill Clements, George Shultz, and Nancy Reagan who resented Clark’s personal closeness and influence over the President. It seemed that outside of Nancy herself, Clark was the only one who could pierce the veil of intractability that hung over Ronald Reagan.

    And just like that, he was gone. Sent packing back to California to enter the private sector as a lobbyist, with nary a word from the aloof Commander-in-Chief. His deputy, Robert MacFarlane, would take the spot as the White House National Security Advisor while US Navy Rear Admiral John Poindexter would be the new Deputy National Security Advisor.

    Poindexter was promptly briefed about the ongoing situation in Iraq and agreed to be an active participant in the scheme to send arms and supplies to Saddam’s regime, in the hopes of keeping him pliant to American interests. The flow of cheap oil from the Khuzestan into the international market was an essential part of the recovery of energy markets following the chaos of the 1970s, and the chaos inside of Iran made them an inefficient, unreliable exporter.

    Poindexter had a closeknit group of intelligence advisors working under him, including one Jonathan Pollard, who he’d inherited from the now retired Rear Admiral Sumner Shapiro.

    Pollard was a figure of some repute within Navy intelligence circles – dismissed as a “kook” by Shapiro himself, Pollard had distinguished himself for work done under Poindexter following a restructuring of America’s intelligence operations in the wake of the debacle in Grenada.

    Many who worked to covertly send dual use technology, spare parts, and weapons for use by the Iraqi government - in direction violation of the Prevention of Genocide Act - were told a sanitised version of the truth. The analysts under Poindexter were led to believe they were funding and arming a covert group of anti-Saddam partisans inside the government who would work to overthrow the Ba’athist regime.

    But the official explanation did not sit right with Pollard. He combed through report after report, finding contradictions in the administration’s narrative. Rather than point out these contradictions to his superiors, Pollard decided to keep this information to himself. His work as an intelligence analyst had proven lucrative thus far. He’d passed classified information to South Africa and China for generous cash rewards.

    He was sitting on a potential goldmine here – all he had to do was dig a little more and find out the truth about Iraqi weapons sales.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    John Poindexter had inherited the role of Deputy National Security Advisor at a time when America’s focus seemed to be drifting toward the Middle East.

    With support from the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), the new Iranian regime made immediate overtures to the Soviet Union. On January 20th, the Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko made a much-publicized visit to Tehran and met with Banisadr, and the leaders of MEK, Massoud and Maryam Rajavi.

    Gromyko was taken for a tour of the “New Tehran” which was presented as a beacon of progressive, revolutionary Shi’ism. Women were installed in positions of authority within the new government, the hijab was voluntary, and Banisadr spoke openly of a national election in 1985 to decide the next President and Prime Minister of the newly formed nation. In the meantime, “citizen councils” were being established in areas firmly under the control of government security forces, ostensibly to focus on the rights and needs of regular Iranians who had been ignored by the former Supreme Leader and the Shah.

    While there were certainly elements of this, the councils were guided by political allies of Banisadr and MEK. These councils thus served not only as a mode of communication between the citizenry and the government, but also allowed the government to have greater influence at the grass roots level.

    Outside of Iran’s urban centres however, there was still substantial opposition to the new regime. The remains of Khomeini’s loyalists had splintered following the death of Khomeini. Without their Supreme Leader to guide them, the Ayatollah’s followers within the Islamic Republic Party and Islamic Revolutionary Guard split along ideological, religious, political, geographic, and ethnic lines. These competing factions hated each other almost as much as they despised Banisadr.

    The Islamic Revolution Front consisted of the most theocratic of Khomeini’s former supporters, and publicly committed themselves to jihad against Banisadr, MEK, and every other splinter group militia inside of Iran. Led by Ali Khamenei, they promised to rebuild the Islamic Revolution, and export it beyond the borders of Iran, in accordance with the views of Ruhollah Khomeini.

    Meanwhile, a more moderate Islamic faction, led by Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, dubbed itself the Islamic Renewal Organisation, sought to re-establish control over Iran in the vein of Khomeini’s Islamic Revolution, with a less confrontational outlook toward the collective west.

    Kurdish separatist groups, like the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan, fought hard in the east to establish an independent Kurdistan which bordered the Turkmen Soviet Socialist Republic.

    The Soviet Union were sympathetic and provided token support for the group. However, complicating matters was the Soviet ties to MEK and the Komala Party of Iranian Kurdistan, which was a Marxist-Leninist Kurdish ethnic party. MEK, as part of Banisadr’s governing coalition, were engaged in ongoing negotiations with Komalah to bring them into the fold andthe Soviet Union was eager to help facilitate this.

    Such a patchwork of rivalries, alliances, theorical and sectarian differences created a headache for all involved, and for once, the United States was content to be on the outside looking in.

    Meanwhile, in Iraq, Saddam’s strength had only grown following his victory in the short-lived Iran-Iraq War. Hussein’s iron grip on Iraq had only tightened as revenue poured in from the oil reserves of the Khuzestan region, and Iraq was seeing massive international investment from France and other countries, despite sanctions by the United States.

    The secret arms sales to Saddam’s forces by the Reagan administration kept their American equipment operational and they were receiving new equipment from France and Soviet Union on a frequent basis. Though American negotiators, led by Oliver North, sold these arms at a high mark up, Saddam’s nigh unlimited oil wealth made him more than happy to pay any asking price. This ensured ample funding for Contra militia groups in Nicaragua, just as the scheme devised.

    The secret arms sales to Saddam’s forces by the Reagan administration kept their American equipment operational and they were receiving new equipment from France and Soviet Union on a frequent basis. Saddam’s nuclear program was also diversifying. The Osirak was being rebuilt publicly, following its destruction by the Israeli Air Force.

    However, a second reactor, the Osirak II was being constructed secretly, in an underground bunker southwest of Najaf. Saddam hoped that should Israel attempt another air attack against Iraq’s nuclear program, they would be preoccupied with Osirak I and not even consider the possibility of a second, underground facility.

    To further sell the lie, Osirak I was protected by the most sophisticated and dense air defense system Iraq could muster, which mixed French, Soviet and American technologies into a formidable ground-to-air missile network. Osirak II was protected by a more modest air defense system by comparison.

    Meanwhile, Saddam’s military was confident in the face of its victory over Iran, and victory parades were held across Iraqi cities well into 1983. Many young Iraqi men, seeking prestige and a way out of poverty, joined the military and their numbers swelled. It was estimated that Iraq’s military was one of the largest on the planet by the start of 1984.

    With such a large military, Saddam’s control over Iraq was stronger than it had ever been. And with his newfound power, Saddam began rattling the sabre toward those leaders and nations who had “betrayed Iraq and its people”. He saved most of his criticisms for Syria, who had given diplomatic and material support for Iran during the conflict. It seemed as though his dream of a powerful Iraq, dominant in the Middle East and on par with global powers like America and the Soviet Union, was well within reach.

    It was in the face of a fractured Iran and a surging Iraq that the Reagan administration considered its options for the future.

    “Well, gentleman”, Reagan began, “What now?”

    Poindexter was eager to assert himself as a leader inside of Reagan’s Security Council.

    “Mr President, if I may,” he responded, “I think we need a new approach with respect to Iran. We’ve ceded to the ground to the Soviets on the basis that the whole situation is becoming a quagmire. But I think there’s space for us to get involved with some of these more moderate religious militias. They are our best chance for negotiating with Hezbollah and getting our hostages out of Lebanon.”

    The hostages were a sore spot for Reagan, who had won the presidency in part for criticizing Jimmy Carter’s own inability to bring American captive’s home. So, the President agreed with this plan in the hopes he could use the connections with Iran’s desperate theocrats to save American hostages in Lebanon.

    The power politics between the United States and Soviet Union inside the Middle East would continue.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    “Can you believe this?”

    “It’s Gary Hart. Of course I believe it.”

    The Mondale campaign team had converged in the conference room inside the Iowa hotel room of Richard Moe, a key advisor to the Democratic front runner on the 29th of January, 1984.

    Splayed out on the table was a series of newspaper articles from numerous prominent publications – The New York Times, Washington Post, The Des Moines Register, New Hampshire Union Leader and others – that depicted the first major scandal of the primary season.

    Senator Gary Hart was photographed with his hands around the waist of two women at a New Year’s Eve party in New York City. In the background was a man dressed in nothing but a diaper, popping a bottle of champagne. A banner toward the back of the room read “I SURVIVED 1983” which the image of a mushroom cloud printed next to it.

    The “end of the world” themed event was a response in part to events in Cuba towards the end of 1983 and was put together by members of the New York socialite scene. While Colorado’s junior senator had secured an invite his wife was noticeably absent. The reports further alleged rampant cocaine use at the event, orgies, and the presence of prostitutes.

    The claims were certainly racy and great tabloid fodder. In the coming days and weeks, more questioned would be asked about the personal life of Gary Hart. Why had he changed his name from Hartspence, why he had repeatedly stated his birth year as 1937 instead of 1936, and why had he twice separated from his wife?

    This event, and the media circus around it, would be damaging to any candidate, but for Hart it was all but fatal – a report weeks later by Rolling Stone magazine would reveal the extent of Hart’s infidelity as far back as 1972. During his time as George McGovern’s campaign manager, Hart had allegedly taken dozens of young staffers to bed. Young, idealistic women who had wanted to work for the next President had instead found themselves used and cast aside by the young, telegenic future Senator.

    For now, however, all the Mondale campaign had to go on was Hart’s dalliance with the New York social elite.

    “Any idea who leaked this?” Moe asked.

    “Probably not one of ours,” James Johnson, responded. “Could have been a jaunted ex-lover for all we know. Maybe Reagan’s people. Those guys Rollins, Manafort, and Stone are a bunch of snakes.”

    “This has got to knock this guy out of the race. I know he was pushing hard in New Hampshire, but he’s done now.”

    The Vice President, who for the past several minutes had sat idly puffing his cigar, cleared his throat to speak. The room fell silent for a second…

    “Are we sure this won’t get him votes with the yuppie crowd?” Mondale asked, dryly.

    Laughter echoed through the suite as the slightest hint if a smile lingered on the former Vice President’s face.

    “We’ve had enough fun. Not as much fun as Gary Hart, maybe…” the Vice President quipped as laughter piped up again, “But let’s go about winning this race early so we can focus on the beating Reagan.”

    Mondale’s confidence was not misplaced. He enjoyed a massive lead over his nearest rival, John Glenn, who’s own deficiencies in charisma and warmth, as well as poor campaign management, had started to undermine his own candidacy. While Mondale was hardly a Reagan type telegenic candidate, his campaign machine was well organized. He had support from a wide spectrum of virtually all the AFL-CIO labour unions, the National Organization For Women, and much of the Democratic Party establishment. In Iowa, the Gallup poll had Mondale’s lead at 47%, while John Glenn was behind him at only 16%.

    As the weeks went on, the candidates gave their speeches, revolving mostly around the same Democratic planks and criticisms of Reagan with their own flavor. The likes of John Glenn criticized Mondale’s ties to “special interest groups”, while former Senator George McGovern returned to the political wilderness claiming to present the clearest choice in 1984 – his hopeful, compassionate liberalism against the “cruel, winner take all cynicism of Reaganism”. McGovern further argued that his was the only administration that would actively reduce Reagan’s military budget, a necessary step to ending the “era of paranoia and conflict that underpins our present relations with the Soviet Union”.

    On February the 11th, 1984, the candidates were invited to a round table debate broadcast by Iowa Public Television. Only two days earlier, a seismic shift in global affairs too place. Yuri Andropov, leader of the Soviet Union, died of organ failure.

    It was on the back of this major change in global affairs that the debate took place.

    The candidates made their opening speeches, trying to differentiate themselves from their fellow Democrats.

    Glenn focused on Reagan’s leadership in the world, criticizing what he called a “bankrupt” foreign policy and cited the Beirut bombings, deaths of American hostages in Cuba, and Second Cuban Missile Crisis as evidence.

    Fritz Hollings made fiscal issues the center of his campaign. He publicly endorsed the idea of a spending freeze on the federal budget and committed himself to a reduction in the deficit and low inflation.

    Gary Hart, noticeably shaken on the stage, attempted to frame himself as representing a “new, bold leadership” while others, Democrats and Republicans alike, remained in the past.

    Reverend Jesse Jackson introduced his candidacy focused on the topics of ending war and care for tie disadvantaged – given the Iowa audience, he focused on the ongoing farm crisis, that saw a record number of foreclosures and American family farms. However, he went beyond this and reflected upon the “parallel urban crisis”. Jackson linked the two issues and spoke of the issue of hunger and homelessness inside of America, made worse by Reagan’s lack of leadership. The poor and the family farmer were Jackson’s main target in his promise for a “new direction” in American life. Alan Cranston focused his opening speech on the idea that only a clear vision built upon “peace and jobs” could defeat Ronald Reagan in 1984.

    Meanwhile, George McGovern outlined specific steps that he would take to improve America’s political situation including an end to US operations in central America, a new dialogue with Cuba and the Soviet Union, a reduction in the defense budget, and a parity program for farmers whereby farm surplus could be used to feed the hungry inside the United States. McGovern finished his speech with his boldest policy proposal – the creation of a Department of Peace to “build upon the proposed Institute of Peace and create the necessary conditions for a just and tranquil world”.

    Mondale began his own opening speech by pointing out the unique position of Iowa Democrats as the first voters in the 1984 election cycle. He called on them to “send a message” to the incumbent President. Mondale outlined the three core challenges that the next President would face after defeating Reagan – building a more peaceful world, strengthening America’s position on international trade, and the restoration of fairness in the American economy and society.

    Finally, Reuben Askew criticized the Democratic Party for losing touch with the mainstream, “forgotten majority” who he claimed to speak for. Askew presented himself as a Southern moderate who mixed a liberal appreciation for social programs, with a commitment to both fiscal prudence and social conservativism, reflected in his pro-life beliefs.

    The candidates probed each other’s positions and beliefs on issues including the Nuclear Freeze, the deficit, taxes, abortion, and the prospect of negotiation of the Soviet Union. The debate was structured around each candidate asking questions to one another. For the most part, these debates were cordial, respectful and free from any major controversy or fire.

    That was until Reuben Askew asked Gary Hart a question relating to his recent sex scandal in the press.

    “Senator Hart,” the Florida Democrat began, “You have been subject of some very troubling accusations in the press, that relate strongly to your character. I refer of course to those reports by the New York Times, Washington Post and other reputable publications that you were present at an event in New York City, without your wife, where cocaine and other immoralities were quote “flowing freely and openly from room to room” as one observer put it. How can you reassure the American people that you have the moral character to be President in light of your involvement in this event?”

    Hart responded, clearly vexed.

    “Well, I would object totally to your question. I did attend that event in New York, but as I’ve stated before – I saw no group sex acts, drug use, or anything else untoward. And these accusations about my marriage – My wife and I have a loving, traditional marriage.”

    Askew immediately shot in with another, follow up question.

    “Do you think these media reports have any bearing on the question of a person’s character and judgement when it comes to being the Commander in Chief of this nation?”

    “No. It’s no one else’s business. It hasn’t been the business of the American public for 200 years and it isn’t today. I won’t answer any other questions on this matter.”

    The moderator injected.

    “Gentlemen, gentlemen. We have limited time here and there are other questions we must get to, so I’m going to end this line of questioning now.”

    Nothing in the debate would generate as much media attention as Hart’s fiery exchange with Askew, and the press immediately sought to pry more into Hart’s scandals.

    The day after the debate, Hart sat down for an interview with Dan Rather where he was again forced to confront questions around his character.

    “These attacks on me and my family have no precedent in our nation,” Hart bemoaned.

    “But Senator,” Dan Rather responded, “There are many who argue that such personal foibles reflect a candidate’s judgement and decision making.”

    “Let’s hold on just one moment”, Hart shot back, “If we reverse this logic, then because Ronald Reagan makes mistakes with regard to Grenada and Cuba, is he therefore unfaithful to his wife?”

    One of Hart’s senior campaign managers, Mike Stratton, immediately buried his head into his hands. This wasn’t happening. Surely, Gary Hart hadn’t just said that.

    But he had.

    “I’m sorry sir,” Rather replied, “I don’t follow.”

    “What I’m saying is,” an exasperated Hart continued, “A candidate’s personal life has no bearing on his ability to be President of the United States. I think that’s something most people know, and I think voters in Iowa and all across this nation recognize that.”

    Hart’s comments were immediately seized upon by the national media, and quickly became fodder for late night comedians and talk show hosts.

    Saturday Night Live would proceed to parody Hart. In the skit on late-night TV show, President Gary Hart, played by Martin Short, solved issues such as world hunger and war while a raucous party rages around him in the White House.

    President Reagan himself had little comment, except to say that “I’ve seen less drama on a Hollywood set than the scandal that has surrounded the Democratic primaries this election cycle.”

    Off the back of constant ridicule in the public eye, Hart’s numbers tumbled down to less than 1% in Iowa and barely any better in New Hampshire. He was ridiculed and heckled at campaign events, and his family had gone into seclusion.

    Only days before Iowa, Gary Hart made a fateful decision – he was suspending his campaign for President. Citing “salacious media reporting” and “an unconscionable stress upon [his] family” Hart dropped out of the race and committed himself to endorsing the eventual Democratic nominee.

    There were immediate questions as to Hart’s political future, given he was up for re-election in the Senate in 1986. Privately, Hart was determined to see his re-election to the Senate through. He would come back from this.

    Gary Hart was determined to prove the media and the doubters wrong.
    With Hart’s collapse and departure from the race before Iowa, his supporters were left scrambling to go for a second choice.

    With only days to go, candidates who’d previously avoided the Hawkeye State suddenly found themselves there, looking to absorb some of the beleaguered Colorado Senator’s former supporters.

    In the end though, the most well-known candidate, Walter Mondale, absorbed most of Hart’s backers.

    The former Vice President won Iowa with 60% of the vote, while George McGovern came in second with 13% of the vote. John Glenn came in third with 10%. Outside the top three, Alan Cranston got 7%, Reuban Askew finished with 6%, Jesse Jackson with 3% and although he had technically left the race, Hart received 1% of the vote.

    A jubilant Walter Mondale took to the stage. This was exactly the strong victory he needed to cement his place as the front runner, for real.

    “You know,” he began, “I said I’d take any victory at all here in the great state of Iowa. But with this great victory tonight – you’ve sent a message that America is ready for a change! Tonight, start of a better America, and the end of the Reagan administration.”

    Mondale’s 60% victory had exceeded even the lofty predictions of the media, who were predicting that the former Vice President would need a victory of 45% to meet the expectation of his status as a frontrunner.

    Of note too, was the political comeback of George McGovern. A second-place finish for the former South Dakota Senator and 1972 Democratic nominee came completely out of nowhere for many.

    In his post-Iowa election speech, McGovern reflected on his previous presidential race:

    “In 1972, you, the people of Iowa, launched my candidacy and allowed me to capture the nomination in 1984. Once again, you have been the ones to prove the pundits wrong – our movement is back. I alone cannot take credit for this victory – this is not a campaign for any single individual, but a campaign for common sense and realism. Together we will bring America home and re-embrace those founding ideals of equal rights and equal opportunities for all.”

    The political resurrection of George McGovern drew the attention of one Hunter S. Thompson, whose epic foray into political journalism, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail in ’72, had turned that year’s primary into the stuff of legends.

    While Hunter watched McGovern’s speech in the throes of an LSD trip, he again felt the spark of his inner citizen activist. Perhaps it was time for Fear and Loathing in 1984.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With Iowa out of the way, the nation’s focus shifted to New Hampshire which was scheduled for the 28th.

    The Mondale campaign was running on all cylinders following the former Vice President’s dominant victory in the first Democratic primary state.

    Even the result for the runner up were fortuitous for Walter Mondale – few had forgotten that George McGovern had suffered one of the worst defeats in Presidential electoral history in 1972.

    Even as the frontrunner rode high, the other candidates in the race sought an upset in New Hampshire. George McGovern estimated later that he visited most of the diners in the state, while John Glenn relayed tales of his time as an astronaut, and Jesse Jackson bemoaned “establishment politicians in Washington” to flex his outsider status.

    In the end, it would matter very little – Walter Mondale won New Hampshire more than 16,000 votes ahead of the runner up, John Glenn. McGovern had come in third.

    Mondale’s strong showing in the two earliest states had made one thing clear – his air of invincibility was very real.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 15th, the Reagan campaign team surveyed the political landscape following the string of state primaries. It was no surprise to them that they had prevailed – Reagan was running unopposed in the Republican primary and had won every state.

    However, by the 15th, the presumptive nominee for the Democratic nomination could claim the exact same thing. Walter Mondale had won every single state in his own party’s quest for the nomination. Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont, Wyoming, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and the Democrats Abroad primary were all in Mondale’s column, and this momentum was set to take him through a clean sweep of the remainder of the contests. Some margins had been closer than others, but Mondale had prevailed in each contest.

    By the 15th, only a single candidate, Jesse Jackson, remained in the race to oppose him.

    Mondale sat down for a private meeting with Jesse Jackson in the Reverend’s Michigan apartment. Both were in town campaigning and had privately agreed through proxies to host a meeting as the two remaining Democratic candidates to assess the future of the primary and the party more broadly.

    “Mr Mondale,” Jackson opened, “I recognise that you are the party establishment favourite to win the nomination. But I am concerned that the standard way of doing politics won’t beat Reagan. What we need is a new politics to open the doors of the Democratic Party and bring new voters into the fold – I don’t just mean young people, I mean women, minority, the poor. The people left behind by Ronald Reagan and by administrations in the past.”

    “Reverend, I completely agree,” Mondale responded, “We do need a new kind of politics and a united party to defeat Ronald Reagan. I think you’re just the kind of man to help us win. And that’s the most important thing – beating Ronald Reagan.”

    The Reverend remained stoic. Was Walter Mondale making a vague proposition to name him his running mate? No, that would be preposterous.

    Jackson knew the sort of thing that was said about him by politicians in Washington. They dismissed his attempts to atone for his “hymietown” remark, derided him and mocked him behind his back. For Washington’s rich political class, Jesse Jackson was too extreme to be President, too black, too socialistic. Mondale was extending an olive branch to get Jesse out of the race, nothing more – but Jesse Jackson intended to take full advantage of whatever leverage he had.

    Remaining stoic, Jackson gave his response.

    “I completely agree, Fritz. Defeating Ronald Reagan is the most important thing. You strike me as a consensus builder and someone who wants to bring the Democratic Party together. I represent a unique coalition of voters that any Democratic nominee will need to win in November. If you were the nominee, would you involve these individuals not just in your campaign but in a potential administration also?”

    “Reverend,” Mondale replied, “I would absolutely make sure that we recognise the contribution that gets made by the many great activists within our party. They will absolutely have a part to play in any administration that I lead.”

    “I’m glad to hear that. Now, I do have a few ideas in mind…”

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following Mondale’s 30-point victory in Michigan over Jesse Jackson, the Reverend announced the suspension of his campaign on the morning of March 18th.

    Walter Mondale was now the presumptive nominee for the Democratic Party. He had successfully waged the most successful Presidential primary of all time as a non-incumbent, and now it was time to shift his focus to defeating Ronald Reagan in November.

    On March 20th, Mondale sat down with his campaign team, and the elder statesman of the Democratic Party, Bob Strauss.

    Strauss was the former DNC chair, the former Trade Representative, and Carter’s envoy in the Middle East. When he spoke, even the Democratic Party’s standard bearer had to listen.

    “Fritz, we’re in a decent spot here. Only about 4 points behind Reagan. That’s the good news. But the economy is improving. And at least for us, electorally speaking, that’s bad news.”

    “What do you recommend?” Mondale asked.

    “I think we ought to slow walk this thing to the finish lines. Let’s take it slow, see what the priorities of the Democratic Congress are, and go from there. We don’t need to make any Hail Mary moves or big decisions now. But we need the Democratic majorities in Congress on board.”

    There was a glint in Mondale’s eye that betrayed his usual Scandinavian stoicism. Strauss gave Mondale a look as if to ask what was on his mind. Mondale obliged.

    “I promised Jesse Jackson that I would make a historic choice for Vice President – that means a woman or minority. We’re going to set a new precedent.”

    Strauss didn’t need to be told twice.

    “That being the case, we don’t want this to come across as a Hail Mary decision. There are qualified candidates out there who proved they can win states we need – Tom Bradley won the governorship of California. There’s Harriet Woods in the Senate from Missouri. Or Martha Lynn Collins, the new Governor from Kentucky. If they help us win any of those states, all the better.”

    Mondale smirked, then cut the cap off another cigar. A party man, through and through. Other advisors might have argued or tried to talk Fritz out of it – but not Strauss. He stood behind the presumptive nominee.

    Mondale chomped on his cigar, lit it, and let out a plume of smoke.

    “Let’s go kick Ronald Reagan’s ass.”
     
    FINAL UPDATE - FOR NOW
  • Hi there,

    I've have decided to discontinue this TL as it exists. I intend to instead move towards a new TL 'Mr Clinton Goes To War' that is both more exciting for me personally and more ambitious than this Mondale one.

    The reason I want to stop this Mondale is quite a simple one - I don't like how this TL is shaping up and I intend to do a Redux, better than this. The reason I don't like it is this - I believe I have altered this timeline too much to set up a Mondale TL.

    The TL is simply too different in its general condition of the 1980s as we knew it - I realise in trying to set up the conditions for Mondale to win too much, to the point where this 1980s has a whole different order that it's an entirely different 1980s to the one we know - to me, that isn't satisfying. We should get a clipse into how Mondale governed Reagan's America in 1985 - not a completely alternative, unknown 1980s with a whole different vibe.

    Furthermore, with what we now know of Reagan's activities, there is more than enough to sink Ronnie without completely altering the 80s that was leading up to it.

    This will, I hope, be revisitied some day in Fighting For Your Future (REDUX) but until then, I will be preparing Mr Clinton Goes To War.
     
    Top