AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 There's no contradiction. Asking the hostages their opinion is a moot point. Not really, as I've already stated, the regime which took them hostage is the one STILL IN POWER. They know what they're' talking about. You think they hold nothing but love for the Iranians? There are plenty of reasons not to trust the Iranians, bring something with more meat to the table. How about the fact that Iran is the top exporter and supporter of worldwide Islamic terrorism. Maybe their lack of a true free press. There are lots of valid reasons to not trust the Iranian regime. Hauling out the opinions of people that were held hostage by Iranians 35 years ago is...a non-starter. Of course they don't trust them. Why should they? Let's try to stay in the present, shall we Who " hauled out the opinions " of the former hostages ? Were they not freely given ? Trotting out, hauling out... You sure do have a cynical view of all this. The Iranians who may have been trusted are the very ones Obama ignored, during their Green Revolution. Yet he sided w/ the Muslim Brotherhood, in Egypt...how'd that work out ? I'd say the US hostages, if they want to offer their 2 cents, ought to be listened to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 My point, which you missed as it went flying over your head, is that it's not exactly surprising that former hostages don't trust their former captors. It's akin to saying abused Catholic altar boys no longer trust Catholic priests. What's flying over my head is how any American who know what in the hell they were talking about would essentially side w/ the Iranians over the American hostages who were held for 444 days. You speak in such dispassionate, ignorant terms. Catholic Priests ? No, they were HELD CAPTIVE by the GOVT of IRAN. Not the 0.000000001 of Priests who molested a few children. You must have also missed, in your blood hot rage, that I don't trust Iran either. FWIW, I was 6 years old in 1980. I didn't miss anything, I just can't fathom how you can say those things, then turn around and say you don't trust Iran either, as the two basically contradict each other. I guess you were too young for it to register then. There's no contradiction. Asking the hostages their opinion is a moot point. You think they hold nothing but love for the Iranians? There are plenty of reasons not to trust the Iranians, bring something with more meat to the table. How about the fact that Iran is the top exporter and supporter of worldwide Islamic terrorism. Maybe their lack of a true free press. There are lots of valid reasons to not trust the Iranian regime. Hauling out the opinions of people that were held hostage by Iranians 35 years ago is...a non-starter. Of course they don't trust them. Why should they? Let's try to stay in the present, shall we Raptor figures all complex foreign problems should be approached with as much emotion as can be dredged up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 I didn't miss anything, I just can't fathom how you can say those things, then turn around and say you don't trust Iran either, as the two basically contradict each other. Are you being serious? Do you really not understand the point selias is making? No valid point IS being made here. I'm more than a bit taken back that ANY American would so casually dismiss the views of the hostages who endured what they did. They KNOW these people. Their input is valuable, and worth while. But you'd rather just shut them up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 homer figures what ever Obama says is cool, no matter what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Wow.....the hostage's opinions is a moot point. Who gets to decide that........someone with just their opinion I guess. Well, in terms of making progress with this problem, yes, it's definitely a moot point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selias 2,398 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Let me try a different tack. Would you form an opinion about the Catholic Church based simply on the opinion of an abused acolyte? I'm not talking numbers of priests vs. tales of abuse. I'm talking about forming an opinion of an entire branch of Protestant faith based simply on the opinions of abused altar boys. That's essentially what you're doing by asking the former hostages their opinion of Iran and using that to validate your point. There are plenty of valid and more current reasons to not trust the Iranian regime. Going back to an incident 35 years ago is doing neither yourself nor your point any justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Wow.....the hostage's opinions is a moot point. Who gets to decide that........someone with just their opinion I guess. Well, in terms of making progress with this problem, yes, it's definitely a moot point. They held Americans for 444 days, and it's a moot point. But Israel made one crucial mistake vs the USS Liberty, and you want to hold that over them for... forever ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 I didn't miss anything, I just can't fathom how you can say those things, then turn around and say you don't trust Iran either, as the two basically contradict each other. Are you being serious? Do you really not understand the point selias is making? No valid point IS being made here. I'm more than a bit taken back that ANY American would so casually dismiss the views of the hostages who endured what they did. They KNOW these people. Their input is valuable, and worth while. But you'd rather just shut them up? That's a combination of hyperbole and disingenuous argument, not to say stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted March 4, 2015 Author Share Posted March 4, 2015 selias....you are so shallow you missed the whole point. Why does simply posting their opinions get you to slinging insults. Talk about hate. Geez. I value their opinion. If you don't so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Let me try a different tack. Would you form an opinion about the Catholic Church based simply on the opinion of an abused acolyte? I'm not talking numbers of priests vs. tales of abuse. I'm talking about forming an opinion of an entire branch of Protestant faith based simply on the opinions of abused altar boys. That's essentially what you're doing by asking the former hostages their opinion of Iran and using that to validate your point. There are plenty of valid and more current reasons to not trust the Iranian regime. Going back to an incident 35 years ago is doing neither yourself nor your point any justice. You're using the same flawed 'track ' again. And Catholics aren't Protestant, so you're losing ground even faster than before. The hostages views are relevant because the very ones who took them then are in power TODAY. It's not a trivial matter. It's a straw man to claim our policy with Iran starts and ends w/ what the hostages think or feel, but their imput ought not, by any means, be so casually dismissed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Wow.....the hostage's opinions is a moot point. Who gets to decide that........someone with just their opinion I guess. Well, in terms of making progress with this problem, yes, it's definitely a moot point. They held Americans for 444 days, and it's a moot point. But Israel made one crucial mistake vs the USS Liberty, and you want to hold that over them for... forever ! No, for the purpose of the debate over our Iranian policy, the USS Liberty is also a moot point. (And incidentally I don't think it was a simple mistake.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selias 2,398 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 selias....you are so shallow you missed the whole point. Why does simply posting their opinions get you to slinging insults. Talk about hate. Geez. I value their opinion. If you don't so be it. I don't hate anyone. That's essentially giving someone or something free rent in your head & heart. My point, which you've obviously missed, is there are plenty of more recent and chronologically valid reasons to distrust the Iranian regime. Bringing in the opinion of the former hostages implies that you have no desire in real debate and prefer to rely simply on emotion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selias 2,398 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Let me try a different tack. Would you form an opinion about the Catholic Church based simply on the opinion of an abused acolyte? I'm not talking numbers of priests vs. tales of abuse. I'm talking about forming an opinion of an entire branch of Protestant faith based simply on the opinions of abused altar boys. That's essentially what you're doing by asking the former hostages their opinion of Iran and using that to validate your point. There are plenty of valid and more current reasons to not trust the Iranian regime. Going back to an incident 35 years ago is doing neither yourself nor your point any justice. You're using the same flawed 'track ' again. And Catholics aren't Protestant, so you're losing ground even faster than before. The hostages views are relevant because the very ones who took them then are in power TODAY. It's not a trivial matter. It's a straw man to claim our policy with Iran starts and ends w/ what the hostages think or feel, but their imput ought not, by any means, be so casually dismissed. My apologies for the religion mishap. I'm halfway through a bottle of Bushmills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted March 4, 2015 Author Share Posted March 4, 2015 selias.....Again just your opinion. The real point went sailing over your head . Of course they hate Iran. You don't have to be Dick Tracy to figure that out, The point is they chose to express their opinion about agreeing with Netanyahu in his speech today. Lots of posters here have done that today. Why do you so begrudge them from doing so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selias 2,398 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 selias.....Again just your opinion. The real point went sailing over your head . Of course they hate Iran. You don't have to be Dick Tracy to figure that out, The point is they chose to express their opinion about agreeing with Netanyahu in his speech today. Lots of posters here have done that today. Why do you so begrudge them from doing so? Because they start from a biased "location". I prefer to approach from a more intellectually neutral location. The hostages hate Iran. Ok, granted. I would too in their shoes. That's not a good start for any sort of dialog or debate. Let's start from a neutral ground around the likes of "Can the Iranian regime be trusted". The evidence leads you to "No" but let's look at the reasons for that. You are doing yourself no favors by starting with the opinion of people of an inherent bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selias 2,398 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 In short: Be intellectually honest with yourself and expect the same from others. I'm not opposed to changing my opinion on a topic based on evidence, but be truly honest about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted March 4, 2015 Author Share Posted March 4, 2015 That is your opinion and choice. I don't share it. Is that honest enough? So be it. I wasn't trying to do myself any favors, just sharing an article about the opinions of the hostages. But I forgot, their opinions are a moot point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 I don't see the need to afford Iran any leeway here. They are who they are. They held Americans hostage for 444 days. That's the honest and TRUE fact of the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 I don't see the need to afford Iran any leeway here. They are who they are. They held Americans hostage for 444 days. That's the honest and TRUE fact of the matter. And why is it that Iranians had such a negative attitude toward the U.S. to begin with? Is that because we are who we are? Pulling up American/Iranian history to demonstrate how inherently evil they are is laughably ironic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 homer figures what ever Obama says is cool, no matter what. BS. Every post I have made on this subject has been principled. It doesn't matter who the president is, I would feel the same. Ironically, it is you - and a few others - who are taking an Obama-centric approach, as the above post proves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Here we go ... It's the USA's fault that the RADICAL MILITANT MUSLIM state is who they are ???? Classic Blame America 1st mantra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Here we go ... It's the USA's fault that the RADICAL MILITANT MUSLIM state is who they are ???? Classic Blame America 1st mantra. Don't try to miss-characterize (lie) your way out of this. I am not making excuses for what happened with the hostages. You miss my point completely I am pointing out it cuts both ways. They didn't just wake up and decide to hate America for no reason. If you want to use history as justification, you can't just cherry pick our grievances and ignore theirs. Sow the wind and reap the whirlwind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Dress it up any way ya like, it's the same garbage. No lie here. You're giving legitimacy to their radicalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 We interrupt this bout of ODS to bring you a little reminder. There is already an Islamic country with over 50 nuclear warheads.... And they have no love for Israel And it was another U.S. President who looked the other way as A.Q. Kahn was developing them. From the book Charlie Wi.son's War The dirty little secret of the Afghan war was that Zia had extracted a concession early on from Reagan: Pakistan would work with the CIA against the Soviets in Afghanistan, and in return the United States would not only provide massive aid, but would agree to look the other way on the question of the bomb. http://books.google....ved=0CBMQ6AEwAA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Dress it up any way ya like, it's the same garbage. No lie here. You're giving legitimacy to their radicalism. BS. That's hypocritical. Their taking of hostages is something we should factor in, but we should just ignore the fact we overturned their democratically elected government and installed a totalitarian puppet? :-\ Absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.