Iran Contra Scandal Analysis

908 Words2 Pages

The Iran-Contra scandal was one of the few criticisms during the Reagan administrations time in the white house. President Ronald Reagan claimed to have no knowledge of the events that took place but key witnesses and evidence seem to have suggested otherwise. Members of the Reagan administration were violating two major American policies during the time of the scandal and the level at which the scandal took place makes it one of the more well-known government scandals. The United States was selling weapons to Iran in order to free hostages held in Lebanon and use the money to support the Contras in Nicaragua. The support for the Contras was against American policy instituted in three amendments between 1982 and1984. Israel acting as …show more content…

The United States was supporting the Contras against the Sandinista government due to the Sandinistas ties to Cuba and the Soviet Union. The Contras lost support from Congress due to constant reporting of human rights violations carried out by the Contras. After the Boland Amendment, the Reagan administration continued to show support to the Contras, which led to Oliver North proposing that the Iran arms money be used to aid the Contras. On November 3, 1986, Lebanese newspapers published the story of the United States providing weapons to Iran and in the matter of a few weeks, everything including the aid to the Contras was beginning to become public. On November 21, 1986, Oliver North and his secretary Fawn Hall conducted their infamous “shredding party” where they attempted to destroy all incriminating evidence prior to a search of their offices. North and Hall were not able to destroy everything and the search resulted in the finding of the Diversion Memo, which provides the connection between Iran weapons sales and aid to the

More about Iran Contra Scandal Analysis

Open Document