Well written Monkey. Keep it up.
+1
-10
+3
*(-1)
-20
This is well written, but your statement contradicts itself.You say Iranians were going to get “the bomb” whether you like it or not yet you would support a policy that provides the means and fully enables such a motivated country to act faster? Again, well written yes. Logical, well I’m sure that will be debated.
I think domestic separatist groups like the IRA and ETA are generally viewed a little differently than “international terrorist” groups and their supposed supporters. I’m not saying that’s right or wrong, but I get the sense that’s how it is.
Yep, it’s Iran’s money and it’s likely we were about to get internationally sued and lose a lot more if we didn’t return the funds. The sad thing in politics, on both sides, is nobody cares about the truth, only what makes their side look the best. In American politics, 99% of people are tribalists, automatically buying into whatever BS their side is shoveling at that particular moment.
To be fair to the doubters, Mr. Obama’s foreign policy has been a mess, only bested by his predecessor Mr. Bush. The best FP president in the last 50 years was, ironically, Bush’s father which presided over the Gulf War.
Iran has to see benefits from the nuclear deal otherwise they have no incentive to follow it, leading to a worse situation. That’s why things like this need to happen and also why the State Dept. needs to come up with guidelines for US businesses to get around Iran sanctions and basically act as Boeing’s sales team.
On Iran’s side, their government also needs to sell the deal to their own right wing crazies, so their incentive is to inflate their “wins” and declare victory over the US and loudly proclaim how they’re screwing over the Satan.
It’s all part of the game, but these nuances are completely lost on critics of the deal. Can’t be helped.
Call it what you may, but the hostages weren’t coming home until cold hard cash was delivered. I guess some believe the lying is necessary. There was a quid pro quo. How do I know when I’m not being lied to by our administration? Just ask you experts on AF? Such hard opinions from “muddy” facts.
Hmm, Obama now has his own Iran-Contra? Seems like we’ve been buying off hostages from Iran since Ronald Reagan? And who says we don’t negotiate with terrorists? Was Olly North running point on this too?
Certainly need to get better deals. But no doubt puts Americans abroad at greater risk.
Hopefully this isn’t true, although it may be, but it didn’t put more American’s at risk after Iran Contra, so…
Of course, the details re: Iran/Contra didn’t come out later so there’s that. Of course, Iran knew they got paid (or more accurately, missiles to threaten Israel) and did not kidnap anybody else. My two cents are no true nation would risk upsetting the US by kidnapping citizens. In addition to the military power, there’s the economic and diplomatic power we possess. That said, rogue states and terrorist organizations may very well act out if it’s spun as a payoff.
Do you guys really go to bed terrified that Iran is going to develop and launch a nuke?
He’d be a lot more convincing if he just answered the question in a minute or less. “No problem reporter. I understand in light of the timing and cash, suspicions are raised. But here’s the explanation…Thanks for asking. Next question.” But instead he spends seven minutes sounding like an annoyed entitled child explaining why he has his hand in the cookie jar. After almost eight years, he still hasn’t figured out how to be a leader. A general he could never have been. But given his background, I guess nothing else should be expected. Embarrassing. [Video:https://youtu.be/xE6JHF_DoP8]
Dude, you’re a total tribalist. See the keywords: “entitled child, still hasn’t figured how to be a leader, his background.” You’re no better than the Code Pink wackos that made fun of George Bush for his communication skills.
In both cases, it’s asinine to comment on delivery and focus on what was said. If he lied, his administration should be bought to account like the Reagan administration was. It seems to me that regardless of what the president would say, you’re going to find fault with it. Focusing on delivery instead of data weakens your case. Long story short, calling somebody an entitled child makes you look more like one than them. It’s essentially akin to when the BLM crowd and SJW instinctively call someone that disagrees with them racist, but in doing so, they are the racists.
^Unless the delivery is what I wanted to bring attention to in that post and not the content. Did you learn a new word today? You may live in some fantastical world where the content is the only thing that matters, but the delivery does not help Obama’s case. He sets the tone, and a more presidential delivery would go a long way to improve the dialogue and alleviate suspicion. Instead, he chooses to act like a spoiled brat. Hacksaw.
Ok bro…great substantive discussion, or something.
this was ransom. but let’s assume it’s not. it doesn’t even matter what Obama or Americans believe if this was a ransom or not. if there’s any hint or indirect hint that capturing Americans yields an unmarked plane filed with cash, it means all of our safety is at risk. I wouldn’t be surprised if kidnappings of US citizens go up. ISIS is watching, and with global operatives, it’s only a matter of time