Mar 28 2007
Looney Left Thankful Iran Took UK Sailors, Not US
Here’s a bit of twisted liberal logic. This person is grateful that Iran took UK sailors instead of US sailors because US sailors are authorized to fight back:
Does that mean that one of his American boarding teams would have opened fire if it had been them in the two inflatable boats that were surrounded by Iranian Revolutionary Guard fast patrol boats off the coast of Iraq last Friday? “Agreed. Yes.”
Just as well that it was a British boarding team, then. The 15 British sailors and marines who were captured and taken to Tehran for “questioning” last week are undoubtedly having an unpleasant time, but they are alive, and Britain is only involved in two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan. If it had been one of Horner’s boarding teams, they would all be dead, and the United States and Iran would now be at war.
This is ludicrous at so many levels the mind boggles. First off, entering another country and abducting people at gun point IS an act of war. Secondly, if the US forces throw off the attack there is no international crisis of hostages as we have now. And finally, it is probably because the US is KNOWN to have the authority to fight back that caused Iran avoided them in the first place! The fact we will respond is why Iran doesn’t cross the line and cause international calamities. The fact the UK would not respond is probably why we have the crisis now. Iran felt the repercussions would be manageable. Talk about your idiotic theories.
Let’s see?
We’re now holding “war games” at sea. Do you think this “frightens” the nut in a dinner jacket? Or does he see the value, that by keeping the Brits, and parading them on TV; “doing” war dances at sea is a WASTE OF TIME?
Too bad Bush is “so” Jimmy Carter! It looks like we’ve got two years to go. And, the boob can’t recognize bad ideas when they come toodling down the pike.
Oh, yeah. To add to the insanity, the french have sent their DeGaulle. Which indicates to everybody that the food service between ships will improve. And, all the be-medaled fools can linger. Fighting phantoms.
While no one steps up to the plate to tell the truth!
Was it this way, too, between 1978 and 1980? We’ve got a boob in the White House. Surrounded by his dad’s Gulf War One “team.” If the names aren’t familiar to you? Well, they caused Bush #1 to LOSE his re-election.
I guess now they think they’re in “safe” waters? Bush ain’t running. Though Condi is making a lot of trips to the Mideast. Just to show what the Saud’s have in their pockets.
And, if that’s not enough? The “United Emerates” have just declared America can’t use “their” bases to attack Iran.
And, you want to take Tony Baloney Blair, seriously? Nothing happens. It’s all theater. For the next two years.
“Well, they caused Bush #1 to LOSE his re-election.”
Bush #1 was perfectly capable of losing his re-election on his own, unfortunately. I wonder if his heart was ever really in it.
Chill out.
The Iranian foreign minstry has announced the one woman among a group of 15 British military personnel seized by Iran will be freed late Wednesday or Thursday; the remianing troops will no doubt follow shortly.
This can all be resolved without the necessity of carpet bombing or incursions against the territorial integrity of Iran (i.e., acts of war).
From the tone of some of the discussion – it appears people want another war.
Keep in mind – people die in wars – sometime our people.
Soothsayer,
Iran has had a 28-year pattern of supporting terrorism and carrying out various acts of war.
What will it take to convince you that restraint is only going to make things worse?
The war against Global Jihadism includes military, diplomacy, and finances. We’re using finances and UN sanctions to bring down Iran. We’re also capturing the Iranians inside Iraq. Looks like we’re making progress. Too bad that the woman is going to be paraded in front of TV worldwide. As soon as she is released, we’ll find out that she was coerced to confess.
But the point that AJStrata was making here was the reax from the liberal nutroots. And now they’re making asinine comments about Tony Snow.
Harold, unfortunately, nothing will convince soothie that appeasement does not work and it will not work with Iran.
Hey Soothie – I don’t see anyone expressing a desire for another war. Say hi to your Ayatollah friends for me.
Appeasement to terrorists will work for us just as well as appeasement to Democrats has been working for the Bush administration.
Iran has gained! The Saudis are THRILLED, too.
Do you know why?
Because the price of OIL is going up, again. So the “profits” get higher for our enemies. While Blair makes clucking sounds. And, you KNOW he’s not gonna fight to get his men back. Those days, for europe are GONE, now.
And, the french? They’ve sent in the DeGaulle. So “all the allies” can make believe they’re doing something. Substituting water theater for flexed muscle.
But then, again, what do you expect? James Baker has offices in Dubai. And, he’s not walking away from the table.
Instead? You got condi trying to “influence” the Israelis into buying into Bush’s “2-state-plan.”
MISSING FROM ACTION? Bush’s popularity.
But the sucker can’t figure out what’s wrong. Since he doesn’t care, much for talented people. And, he’s hoping that condi satisifies the Saudis. Which Bandar tells him, “is his job.”
Up ahead? Gonzales isn’t doing Bush any favors.
And? Keeping his pants up in the Oval Office is on par with Jimmy Carter’s behaviors. While Jimmy Carter SWEATED IT OUT. This guy is relaxed. While, perhaps, bothered that his popularity isn’t as high as it once was.
Maybe, he’s hoping Condi will improve things, no?
Sooth and Carol,
Are we to infer that kidnapping and the threat of show trials don’t rise to the level of discussion?
And Carol, you overlook Ross Perot’s role in GHWB’s defeat.
Bush II has clearly been too passive in his own defense, but he is also clearly not short on intelligence. He has been elequent and even prophetic on the virtues of liberty. Even in interviews, his thoughts are there for the understanding.
CAROL—-it is easy to call names and describe people as “boobs”— exactly what would your plan be?
And the United States has a 54 year pattern of interfering in the internal affairs of Iran. In 1953, the democratically elected Mossadegh government was, at the behest of John Foster Dulles, Secretary of State and Standard Oil attorney, and Allen Dulles, CIA director and Standard Oil attorney, overthrown by the CIA, which thereupon installed the Shah on the Peacock Throne.
The reason – Iran had the unmitigated gall to want to renegotiate its agreements with Big Oil.
Norm Schqartzkopf, Sr., the father of Gulf War I Norm, trained the SAVAK, the Shah’s dreaded secret police. What followed was an oppressive monarchical regime, in which the Pahlavi family systematically looted Iran for up to 12 Billion dollars.
When the Shah was finally deposed and fled to the US, we allowed him entry, along with the stolen $12 billion.
It was only then that Iran seized American hostages, so get off the freakin’ soapbox until you know the background. We’ve done far worse to Iran than they’ve ever done to us, including supporting Saddam Hussein and his use of poison gas in the Iran-Iraq war – a war in which Saddam/Iraq fought as our proxy – and killed 1,000,000 Iranians using US weapons and intelligence information.
“It was only then that Iran seized American hostages” –
Of course, it was then that the Islamists were in control.
Sooth, you are an endless apologist for the terrorists.
Odd, there weren’t any hostages when the Shah was in power.
By the way, the seizing of our embassy and our diplomats was, as I recall, a shocking violation of international law. It established the new Iranian regime as an outlaw government.
And I’ve met Iranian exiles who have said that the Ayatollahs’ regime sucks.
So – just so I get this straight from the Straspherista’s mouth:
It’s OK for the United States to overthrow a democratically elected government and install a monarchy, then train the monarch’s secret police in torture and interrogation techniques – at a cost of thousands of innocent Irani lives
but it’s TERRORISM
when the Iranians take some hostages and then release them – essentially unharmed.
I just need to know the boundaries of your hypocrisy, thanks.
Oh – there were hostages all right under the Shah – but they weren’t American hostages – just Iranian citizens in the Shah’s torture chambers and dungeons.
More misdirection from Sooth.
sooth:
Democratically elected? You are so pathetic.
1953????How many Iranians have the mullahs killed in the last 30 years? And here you are running your mouth about something you know nothing about sooth, that happened in the Cold War in 1953 that involved a Soviet backed government nationalizing British Petroleum assets in the country. Should it have happened? I don’t know, but at the time allowing Stalinist Russia to get it hands on Iran’s oil was too scarey for some people.
But that has been more than half a century ago and these sailors had nothing to do with it.
And today that country is run by a government that only allows certain people the opportunity to even hold office. It hangs homosexuals, ferments murder and mayhem.
Now time and again I hear how important it is that international law and the Geneva Conventions be respected, but when a country like Iran flounts both hypocrites such as yourself make all kinds of excuses for them.
It is bizarre.