How Did The Iran Contra Scandal

in 1985 that the U.S. might sell arms to Iran through Israel with the goal of releasing American hostages held in Lebanon by Iranian groups (“The Iran-Contra Report” Presidency.UCSB.edu). The arms would be used to aid Iran in their ongoing war against Iraq (“The Iran-Contra Report” Presidency.UCSB.edu). Robert McFarlane, a national security advisor who brought the suggestion to President Reagan, believed that the deal would improve U.S.-Iran relations, in addition to Lebanese relations, thus giving the U.S. needed influence in the Middle East (Wolf PBS.org). However, several advisors to Reagan questioned the legality of such an act, as both U.S. policy, prohibiting straight arms-for-hostage swaps, and the embargo on arms to Iran, the Arms Export Control Act, condemned that course of action. (“The Iran-Contra Report” Presidency.UCSB.edu). Though his advisors Caspar Weinberger (Secretary of Defense) and George Shultz (Secretary of State) opposed the sales, President Reagan listened to McFarlane (National Security Advisor) and William Casey (CIA director) and went through with the plan, but Reagan never actually signed the plan or reported it to Congress, as required by law (“The Iran-Contra Report” Presidency.UCSB.edu). Thus, Reagan could later claim that he had no knowledge of the arms sales, as it was never formalized. Control of this operation was given to the National Security Council, which was also conducting aid operations to the contras (“The Iran-Contra

The United States history during 1977 to 1989 went through two presidencies and whirlwind of events happened. When President Jimmy Carter became president he wanted to lower the inflation rates to make life easier for the people of the United States. While that was his goal it got completely derailed. Near the end of Jimmy Carters presidency, a group of Iranian students took over the U.S Embassy in Tehran and took people hostage. Over the course of the 444 days the hostages where held captive while the people of the United States voted for a new president to help lead them into a new direction. The people voted for Ronald Reagan. While he was president things didn’t go as he planned as well. The issues with Iran did not calm down and escalated to something bigger. After the Iran hostage crisis, the US had another issues with Iran and it was the Iran- Contra affair. During this essay I will be talking about the book called “Taken Hostage” by David Farber and the information in the book. The book is about the time frame of Jimmy Carter’s presidency and the issues with Iran and the hostage crisis. The second half of my essay is towards President Ronald Reagan’s and the issues about the Iran- Contra affair and the lasting issues between Iran and the United states.

Additionally, documents were shredded to mask the paper trail in the White House. Therefore, no connection between the scandal and President Reagan was ever proven. Whenever Reagan was asked about his knowledge of the Iran-Contra affair, he would claim, "I don't remember." Regardless, during the Iran-Contra Scandal, only 14 percent of Americans believed the president when he said he had not traded arms for hostages.

One of the significant events of Reagan that influenced public was Iran-Contra affair in 1986, which the United States was found guilty by the International Court of Justice of war crimes against Nicaragua. As a result, Reagan’s popularity slipped from 67 percent to 46 percent in less than a week (Mayer). By the time, it was the low point of the Reagan presidency (157, Ehrman) Add to this situation, the failure of space program led to negative ethos of Reagan in public’s mind. President Reagan understood this situation and tried to calm the hostilities by delivering the speech sincerely.

Which followed through to Ford’s Administration and the Carter Administration. As well as the illegal bombing of Cambodia. Carter gets harassed about his evidence of his failed foreign policy because of the Iranian Hostage crisis, which was not handled well, and the credit for the solution belonged to Reagan.

To begin, Congress, by fair vote, decided in the 1980s that the United States should not assist the contras fighting the socialist Sandinista government of Nicaragua (Corn 2006). Yet, the Reagan White House concocted several imaginative ways to pull an end-run around democracy (Corn 2006). Reagan’s decisions such as selling weapons to Iran were made with the knowledge that he would not suffer a decline in presidential approval. Thus, Reagan took various steps that were violations of law that not only involved himself, but members of the CIA. By 1986, two big revelations happened that caused this scandal to abrupt publically. The first was the shoot-down of a cargo plane over Nicaragua and the admission by the sole survivor that the plane had been delivering arms to the Contras against congressional restrictions (Kornbluh 2011). The second, revelation was the news story of Lebanon that stated

President Reagan left office at the conclusion of his second term, on January 1989, proceeded by vice president, George H.W. Bush. President Reagan looked back on the effort that had been made in facilitating strains with the Soviet Union. When he left, situations swiftly rose for the rest of 1989 bringing down

To start with, the Iran-Contra Affair was a major political scandal during the Reagan Administration in the late 80’s. It started out when Iran secretly asked for the U.S to sell them weapons for the war against

During the election of 1980 most Americans eyes were fixed on two presidents. Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. Most Americans hearts were fixed on one issue. The Iranian hostage crisis. Jimmy Carter, the current president, had tried without success to end the crisis diplomatically. Ronald Reagan, an actor turned politician, had very little experience in a political position. Carter was not fit to handle the current crisis. His attempts to free the hostages had gone poorly both diplomatically and through use of force. Ronald Reagan was not very well known as a politician, he was known as an actor and many people believed that he would just act in office instead of being the

Where he was later accused of condoning a radical leader identified as Rios Montt and death units affiliated with the Salvadoran military that was subsidized by the U.S. government. But with those accusations, Reagan put a lot of energy into overthrowing the government in Nicaragua that almost ended Reagan's presidency. Thus resulting in the U.S. Senate cutting Reagan's ties to his surrogate army in Central America. Which this ended with The White House running the war from the basement of The White House and funded the operation by paying for some of it with prohibited arms sales to Iran that triggered the Iran-Contra Affair. These complications ended in Reagan evading prosecution by his affiliates saying he had no knowledge of the affair.

I think the arms for hostage ordeal in Iran should have led to a further investigation of the truth for the American people. It is unfortunate that it led to many people being fired in Washington, a typical response from our government today. I do not believe that Reagan should not have been impeached but should have been more transparent on the Iran Contra Scandal. This ordeal led to further distrust in our government and made people question Reagan’s authenticity about keeping America safe.

Ronald Reagan is to this date the oldest serving president, and the effects of his presidency have affected not only the United States of America but most of the world as well. The consensus among historians is that Ronald Reagan left a lasting legacy that was a great one in numerous ways. His Reaganomics improved America’s economy greatly, and secured its future economic prosperity. He also fought communism head on and was able to end it in most parts of the world, but more importantly in Soviet Russia. However, in doing so he got wrapped up in the Iran-Contra Affair, which will forever be tied to his name in a negative regard. Within America, Reagan was able to improve society such as his success in curbing the use of illegal drugs.

Not only did he knowingly commit these treasonous acts, he then went on to knowlingly lie about them. First, he denied the operations existance, then he denied the truth of the matter. This is similar to Nixon's involvement with the watergate scandal (except Nixon didn't order the covert actions, only covered them up). Nixon was in the process of impeachment and conviction when he resigned as president and was later pardoned. Reagan is in a very similar situation to this, except he took the extra step further and actually aided in the premeditation and execution of the actions.(4)

The Iran-Contra Scandal occurred on the (insert specific dates) in the midst of the cold war. Oliver North, a member of the National Security Council of the United States, was accused of diverting money from weapon sales in Iran to support the Contras in Central America. Provide context of central America, how this was exposed, what happened to north, specific trial stuff, talk about the cold war/tensions… state thesis at end of sentence, state arguments, conclude.

Challenges that the relationship between the “people” and congress will and should always continue as a check and balance system. One example of a challenge between some members of the NSC, congress, and the people come from the controversial program later called the Iran- Contra affair. Iran-Contra started when President Ronald Reagan started funding the rebel group, known as the Contras, in Central America. During the early days of funding the rebel group a story by Newsweek entitled: Americas Secret War brought a different and unfavorable attention to the program (Brown.edu, 2013).