Ricardolindo
Banned
I'm not American and I'm not a conservative but, IMO, while Jimmy Carter is a good man, he wasn't fit for the presidency.
That was always the challenge with the cold war, wasn’t it?You know it should be spelled 'Amerika', right?
The most evil Government ever to be on the Earth. Why, history will show Bill Clinton and George W to be far worse than Stalin, Mao and Hitler all together.
Or something like thst.
All, Something has always puzzled me: The Carter presidency.
He might have been a more moral character than some other presidents?
After all, he was (I read) a reasonable good business man, growing his peanut farms.
Surely advocate of civil rights and anti-segregation.
Camp David, National energy policy, SALT II, combatting stagflation, embargoes after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, etc.
Was he really that inefficient?
What could have made him into a great president (or greater depends on temperament)?
What went wrong (yes, hostage crisis, etc etc)
To me Jimmy was the last President who was not a genocidal war criminal who deserve to be strung by their balls at the Hauge.
Carter becoming President later on when he had more experience and more allies would have helped considerably I think. If you look at his real blunders, they are shared with most others who've gained the Presidency young. Unfortunately for Carter, he was president during an unforgiving time, with the country facing serious problems and Carter personally facing some gifted political opponents. It doesn't help that Carter did some things that people on both ends of the political spectrum still find hard to forgive. Considering that Carter went on to become one of the best ex-presidents America has had, I think a Carter that gains power in the 80s or 90s could secure a better place for himself in people's popular memory.
Carter sits out 1976 and is elected in 1980 after a second Ford term?
If we judge Carter by his moral compass, the right action was to cut ties with the Shah. Did he believe that the next man in line would be a saint? did anyone not brief him on the Ayatollah's hatred of US?
Whichever way it is hard to see what else could have been done. Continuing support for the Shah was not going to win the day anyway.
Interesting view that he might have been a better choice in 1980. Any views on that?
Grant was perhaps the most corrupt man ever to hold the Presidency
What could have made him into a great president
He was responsible for the corruption due to the massive nepotism of his recruitment policy.Grant's Administration was incredibly corrupt. The man himself wasn't.
During our the Gulf War against Iraq in 1991, we bombed a lot of stuff including electrical generating plants which I’d consider more part of the civilian infrastructure.Can we please not bandy about "genocidal" too lightly?
Not Genocidal.During our the Gulf War against Iraq in 1991, we bombed a lot of stuff including electrical generating plants which I’d consider more part of the civilian infrastructure.
And then, we kept on sanctions for another 12 years. And of course this hurt the most vulnerable of society, and not, for example, mid-level Baath officials and above.
And finally, in 2003, also with a lot of bombing, we went further and won the second Gulf War and then engaged in rebuilding, with I suppose average results.
It could have been the classic Military option that gets presented to the President in hopes that it will get turned down as being too unrealistic.Interesting!
If Eagle Claw had been a 100% success, how much would it have meant for his popularity?
After all, the economy was still a problem - That said, It has been my impression that he actually did something about it (am I wrong there as well).
Eagle Claw looked as the most infantile operation, put together by absolute amateurs. Insofar as the US forces hardly can be said to be amateurs, it leaves one with a suspicion that it was never supposed to work anyway. … But that is indeed a nasty thought.
After all, the economy was still a problem - That said, It has been my impression that he actually did something about it (am I wrong there as well).
Grant's Administration was incredibly corrupt. The man himself wasn't.
During our the Gulf War against Iraq in 1991, we bombed a lot of stuff including electrical generating plants which I’d consider more part of the civilian infrastructure.
And then, we kept on sanctions for another 12 years. And of course this hurt the most vulnerable of society, and not, for example, mid-level Baath officials and above.
And finally, in 2003, also with a lot of bombing, we went further and won the second Gulf War and then engaged in rebuilding, with I suppose average results.
He started many deregulation programs that RR would later finish and take credit for.
If Eagle Claw had been a 100% success, how much would it have meant for his popularity?
When the revolution was just beginning, before the Islamic Republic was even an idea, people thought of the Ayatollah as a sort of moral guiding figure closer to Benjamin Franklin or Dolores Jiménez y Muro than a potential dictator.
I think Carter had a tough game to play as he was liked for his inexperience in a way and granting him additional experience makes his presidency go better. If he had primaried right wing Sen. Talmadge in ‘74 in an anti-Washington post-Watergate campaign, he might have been able to build up a decent Congressional record over one full term and end up as a significantly stronger legislator by 1980. The problem is he probably wouldn’t be able to channel the post-Watergate feeling as effectively 6 years later. He could probably rack up a strong 2nd or 3rd place finish if he’s the only Southern moderate candidate and end up as somebody else’s VP pick. That could set him up to take over sometime in the 1980s.
Carter would probably have gotten more votes for launching airstrikes all over Iran and letting the hostages die than trying to negotiate.I think that is indeed a worthy argument:
Eagle Claw would have gained him popularity, but probably not enough to get re-elected.
On the Ayatollah: Did Reagan say something prior to Khomeni getting into power?
The whole mess of Iran was indeed … a mess. It is like 'why go for a disaster if you can have a calamity'
Was Carter badly advised or was there really no other way from a US perspective?
Carter would probably have gotten more votes for launching airstrikes all over Iran and letting the hostages die than trying to negotiate.