Ransom for captives?
 

Or a smart move?



I think it was ingenious and creative to pay kidnappers their own money!

Just saying.........

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2...m-sot-erin.cnn


Barney

If the republicans had done it, it would have been genius, but since the democrats did it, it's criminal.

With Trump imploding the opposition will grasp at any straw.

The funds were going to be paid back anyway. The US saved money by not waiting for the court to render decision.

Trump would of stiff them, kept the money. Going by his past history of business practices. Plenty of people feel the same way, once money is in the pocket the harder it is to give back.

Barney

Obama can't win he was getting sh@t during the negotiations for not getting them out then he gets sh!t for getting them out.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...ners/88962208/

These aren't even real "Muricans".

Why the Hell did we pay to get them back?

We didn't pay to get them back.

And, they were United State citizens.... That is why we made arrangements to get them back.

We had the money.

Now they have it.

That means we paid them.

It was already their money. It wasn't our money.

Read the article....

Ever heard of the term "Possession is nine-tenths of the law?"

When it involves two adversarial countries like the US and Iran it's ten-tenths.

I guess it was just too much to ask of you to read the article so you would actually know what took place and could quit babbling about one more thing you are clueless about. 😏

I don't agree with the concept of dual citizenship.

Citizenship should be "one to a customer".

I'd allow kids with legitimate claims to more than one to stay in a limbo status until their 18th birthday. Then it's decision time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cypJhxt6E8

I don't have to "read the article".

I can tell it's bullshit just from the discussion about it.

Doesn't really matter if you agree with dual citizenship or not. The law is what it is regardless of how you feel.

So Joad, you prefer to give Iran it's money and let them keep the captives?

Or you want to stiff Iran on the money, still not get the captives, and trash all deals made, in favor of war war war?

Or is a bit of Dem bashing all that matters?

Bingo!

Stiff em.

What are they gonna do?

Garnish our wages? :rolleyes:

As for the captives, let them serve as an example of where not to go if you want to travel safely.

I suspect that as soon as Iran realizes we don't give a shit, they'll let them go anyway.

As for war, what war?

Iran doesn't want war with us.

Naw. But we'd want war with them....

Hillary does.

I don't.

You realize that what we have done now is send Iran a message that any American they can lay their hands on is potentially worth $100 million bucks to them.

If it wasn't safe to travel to Iran before, it sure as Hell isn't now.

Sure we have.

Unless we've sent a message that taking captives can mess up your otherwise expected cash flow.

There's a thing about cliches - they are often wrong. It is an inaccurate statement of the law. There are several types of legal action that one can take against one that is in wrongful possession of property. Indeed, the US was subject to an international judgment for seizure of the funds.

Of course you won't read the article. It might pop that bubble you live in. :rolleyes:

The crux of this is simple, the money was not ours, Iran's. Never was anything else! Sell the arms to them now? No way!

The US was going to have a judgment costing a whole lot more against it. The ""prisoners"" were part of a deal for normalization of relations and any funds owed were to be repaid. Period!


Barney

I agree with you on principle and people with dual citizenship's typically have mixed loyalties which is not good. But it is not a US decision whether to allow dual citizenship but the country the immigrant hails from and/or citizen of prior to applying for US citizenship.

An International Judgement?!:eek:

That and four bucks will get them a Latte at Starbucks.:rolleyes:

We're a Rouge Superpower. We bomb whoever we feel like bombing. We invade whoever we feel like invading. And we can tell them to stick that "International Judgement" where the sun don't shine.

Damn, you talk almost as tough as der Trumpenfuhrer.

How does that translate to governance of the people of this country? Should we citizens stick the "constitution" where the sun don't shine.

We are a country that honors treaties and pays it's bills. If we don't, let us welcome that "C" credit rating, and join Trump in seeking loans from the Russian Mafia.

Does anyone remember why we are holding on to Iranian assets in the first place? As far back as the Carter administration, Iranian assets were frozen because of Iran's behavior - the take-over the US embassy and detaining US hostages. Obama did it again in 2012 because Iran was using its banking system as a money laundering function to fund terrorism...again, because of Iran's behavior.

I'm delighted that we got our hostages back, but does anyone think Iran's behavior will be changing anytime soon? Does anyone think that the money that was paid for the hostages - some or all of it - won't end up buying some terrorists some new toys to wreak havoc with?

Whether they change or not remains to be seen as they have a young, well-educated population, many of whom are pro-Western/American. That said, the receipt of $400 million of their own money will play no role in their future behavior.

Well, it certainly won't improve their behavior, that's for damn sure.

How can you be so sure of that? I think you can't - you speak out of ideology, rather than on the basis of empirical evidence. It seems to me that having a reason to trust the U.S. might make a positive difference, however slight.

Sure we do.:rolleyes:

http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswit...eaties-exhibit

After eight years of Barack "Give Away the Store" Obama, it would be a refreshing change to hear some tough talk come out of the White House.

You've gone completely 'Alt-right', haven't you, trumpkins? :rolleyes:

Oh yeah, Don. It certainly sounds like they trust us and want to play nice in the sandbox.

https://www.rt.com/news/345290-iran-leader-blasts-us/

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ir...-idUSKCN0ZN2JV

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/majid-...b_9977768.html

The street runs both ways!



Barney

They are right not to trust us. I don't trust us. When have we ever dealt with Iran in good faith?

July 7, 2016

May 15, 2016

These articles are about the same tests, not separate ones which is what you no doubt hope we'll assume.

When the US plays dirty it is to be overlooked don't you know. The old saying seems to play well here...


""Do as I say not as I do!""

The US government thru it's CIA activities warranted to some degree granted have perpetrated bad acts. Still do to this day. Our hands are not clean to say the least.

Barney

Gee, I thought that was what the Iran Nuke Deal was all about? Obama wants improved relations with Iran as part of his legacy...apparently cost be damned.

Or, we could have just sent them the "new toys" through a drug dealing South American dictator like Saint Ronnie did!:p