Puh-Leaze. That's what happened in Viet Nam too, right? Was Viet Nam the
right thing to do? --If-- the Congress did as you said, Reagan, still
-cowardly- went in secret and funded his own private army, helped by that
scumbag Olliver North.

No, that's not what happened in Vietnam. The Tonkin Gulf Resolution
provided funding throughout.

The TGR provided funding from 1965 -- 1975? That's flatly in contradiction of
the United States Constitution which prohibits any appropriations covering more
than two years.

Article One, Section 8, para 12 reads:

"To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall
be for a longer term than two years"

So you are flatly wrong, and not for the first time. Precision -- it's
precision you want, lad. Great thing for an educator, don't you know.

You should read the Constitution, Ed. It's a fabulous document.

Sorta odd for a military man and patriot like yourself not to be more familiar
with the parts of that document that impinge so directly on the military. But
I digress.

So.

Are you saying that President Ford -didn't- try to get Congress to throw some
-more- money/assets at Viet Nam?

They refused right? It's the same thing that happened in Iran-Contra. The
principle is the same. Now, had Gerald Ford gotten first LT North to sell TOW
missiles to some third party and then sent that money to the S. Viets, then
you'd have the same -principle- in action as what Reagan did.

Reagan was a bum. Olliver North is a scumbag. He dragged the good name of
the Marine Corps through the mud just like these "re-cycled hillbillies" have
done to the Army at Abu Ghraib. Of course these natioanl guardsmen had the
blessing of the SecDef. If you recall, Ed, Weinburger and George Shultz
opposed trading arms for hostages, but it went ahead any way.
"Poppy" said he wasn't in the loop, but that was a lie.



Walt