Ronald Reagan is burning in Hell

I can't believe anyone could defend the man, let alone admire or even positively appreciate his achievements or person. Seriously, is there anyone out there who can honestly defend the foreign policy of the United States in central America in the 1980's? He was the incompetent figurehead at the center of one of the most brutal administrations in American history and would've been executed for war crimes if the United States wasn't a superpower. Nicaragua is a case example and a representative one.

To date, the United States is the sole and first country ever to be condemned by the International Court of Justice for state-sponsored international terrorism, due to its funding of Contra terrorists in Nicaragua against a democratically elected Sandinista government. The only crimes of this government was terminating decades of U.S.-friendly dictators and even whilst being attacked by a foreign-backed army, the government did not even close a newspaper, major opposition press (La Pernsa) was still functioning despite calling for a violent overthrow of the government (though it was basically U.S. propaganda), this is the only case in history I believe this has happened.

So how did a self-proclaimed friend of liberty and freedom treat the 1986 World Court decision to pay massive reparations to a country brutalized because it dared not to allow itself to be subjected to economic colonialism? It openly rejected the decision and kept brutalizing the nation till it essentially offered an ultimatum to keep killing and torturing civilians unless the U.S.-backed candidate was elected (which happened in 1990).

Of course this goes without mentioning El Salvador, Guatemala, Iraq and Indonesia, all brutal regimes which functioned with the support and praise of the Reagan administration.

>>16
"Hugo's rants about the US are COMPLETELY different in tone and pure common sense when compared to Mahatma's wise musings."

"I appeal for cessation of hostilities ... because war is bad in essence. You want to kill Nazism. Your soldiers are doing the same work of destruction as the Germans. The only difference is that perhaps yours are not as thorough as the Germans ... I venture to present you with a nobler and a braver way, worthy of the bravest soldiers. I want you to fight Nazism without arms or ... with non-violent arms. I would like you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions. Let them take possession of your beautiful island, with your many beautiful buildings. You will give all these but neither your souls, nor your minds. If these gentlemen choose to occupy your homes, you will vacate them. If they do not give you free passage out, you will allow yourself, man, woman and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them ... I am telling His Excellency the Viceroy that my services are at the disposal of His Majesty's Government, should they consider them of any practical use in advancing the object of my appeal."

"If we had the atom bomb, we would have used it against the British."

"One can understand the necessity for registration of Kaffirs who will not work."

"Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized - the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty and live almost like animals."

"Why, of all places in Johannesburg, the Indian location should be chosen for dumping down all kaffirs of the town, passes my comprehension. Of course, under my suggestion, the Town Council must withdraw the Kaffirs from the Location. About this mixing of the Kaffirs with the Indians I must confess I feel most strongly. I think it is very unfair to the Indian population, and it is an undue tax on even the proverbial patience of my countrymen."

"I do not consider Hitler to be as bad as he is depicted. He is showing an ability that is amazing and seems to be gaining his victories without much bloodshed."
>Mahatma Gandhi