| You are quite right, opinions vary. My own take is that the Boland Amendment was unconstitutional, and that the Administration had a moral obligation to the Contras. Further, by eluding the law through the National Security Council, the letter of the law was not broken, although the spirit was, of course. As for the arms trading, I honestly believe that Reagan did not see it as violating policy, since the rationale was to do it through the moderate faction in the government, and thus strengthen its hand. Of course, in the end, it was not appropriate, since it still provided an incentive for hostage taking, but the frustration level at not being able to liberate the Beirut hostages was high, and just the atmosphere in which mistakes like that are easily made........ |
