Obama denies $400M payment to Iran was ransom

[Silurian]

6 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

OK. 

 

I am not offering an argument to you.

 

I just want to know if you genuinely believe this. 

 

I am just hoping to understand the mindset of my fellow Americans.

 

You honestly see this as a good bit of diplomacy and not a ransom payment?

 

OK...so how do you define a ransom payment?

 

When someone is kidnapped and a ransom payment is made, couldn't that also always be called just a "good bit of diplomacy"? 

 

Right now, there is no proof that the $400M was a ransom payment beyond the opinion of some Republican politicians. Show me proof/facts that there was a ransom deal. Do you have that?

 

If you read deeper in this, you will find there was no ultimatum issued by Iran to free hostages for $400M. There was more of a kind of "nod" if you will that as a matter of trust, Iran would resolve the hostage situation. This is the kind of trust building that works both ways. As stated in my previous post, Iran has a base for their mistrust of the US. Granted hostage taking in the first place doesn't help the trust situation between Iran and the US. The US owed Iran some money, they paid it.

 

Of course I do agree the timing is suspect but suspicions do not facts make. Suspicions based on fear make for dangerous opinions.

 

 

[Boon Mee]

Bottom line boys...even if Barry gets up and lies for what was it - 7 min that it wasn't a ransom payment, we all know it was.

Didn't pass the "Duck" test no way, no how...

[Silurian]

5 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Bottom line boys...even if Barry gets up and lies for what was it - 7 min that it wasn't a ransom payment, we all know it was.

Didn't pass the "Duck" test no way, no how...

 

No, you offer no proof beyond your own opinion. Try again.

[ClutchClark]

 

42 minutes ago, Silurian said:

 

Right now, there is no proof that the $400M was a ransom payment beyond the opinion of some Republican politicians. Show me proof/facts that there was a ransom deal. Do you have that?

 

If you read deeper in this, you will find there was no ultimatum issued by Iran to free hostages for $400M. There was more of a kind of "nod" if you will that as a matter of trust, Iran would resolve the hostage situation. This is the kind of trust building that works both ways. As stated in my previous post, Iran has a base for their mistrust of the US. Granted hostage taking in the first place doesn't help the trust situation between Iran and the US. The US owed Iran some money, they paid it.

 

Of course I do agree the timing is suspect but suspicions do not facts make. Suspicions based on fear make for dangerous opinions.

 

 

 

Yes. Thank you but ai am already familiar with the way the story was "spun". 

 

Its the old, "You can't prove intent so we are innocent" ploy. 

 

Obviously, we are not going to find absolute proof about a closed-door handshake deal.

 

Whats interesting to me is that this WH can make such obviously nefarious deals and sell it to their voters so easily. I constantly find it hard to believe Americans have become so stupid.

For instance, you seem like you have more intelligence than many of the obama supporters here based on the fact you have not called anyone names yet you actually believe that this was simply coincidence. 

 

I worry for the future of America. We used to be an intelligent people.

Edited August 5, 2016 by ClutchClark

[Silurian]

6 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

 

Yes. Thank you but ai am already familiar with the way the story was "spun". 

 

Its the old, "You can't prove intent so we are innocent" ploy. 

 

Obviously, we are not going to find absolute proof about a closed-door handshake deal.

 

Whats interesting to me is that this WH can make such obviously nefarious deals and sell it to their voters so easily. I constantly find it hard to believe Americans have become so stupid.

For instance, you seem like you have more intelligence than many of the obama supporters here based on the fact you have not called anyone names yet you actually believe that this was simply coincidence. 

 

I worry for the future of America. We used to be an intelligent people.

 

I guess this is one area where we see this "deal" in different ways. You see it as a nefarious deal where I see it as a "bonus" to the existing situation. Iran didn't have to release the hostages. There was no public agreement to such. To me, as a matter of much needed trust building between Iran and the US, Iran resolved the hostage situation. These types of steps are needed to move forward.

 

 

[Scott]

Off-topic post and replies removed.  

[ClutchClark]

Just now, Silurian said:

 

I guess this is one area where we see this "deal" in different ways. You see it as a nefarious deal where I see it as a "bonus" to the existing situation. Iran didn't have to release the hostages. There was no public agreement to such. To me, as a matter of much needed trust building between Iran and the US, Iran resolved the hostage situation. These types of steps are needed to move forward.

 

 

 

If we have now admitted that we owe $1.7 billion for this 40 year old arms deal then why was the entire amount not paid back?

 

Why $400M under the table at this very moment that hostages were released? And as you already mentioned earlier, Iran taking US hostages suggests the only group wanting to move forward in peace is obama.

 

But this discussion has moved away from the actual topic--$400 million in Euros paid to our enemy, Iran, within hours of Iran releasing American citizens they had taken as hostage.

 

On the one hand you argue it was not a ransom but only a poorly timed debt repayment and on the other hand you attempt to justify why a ransom was required...except it was not a ransom.

 

I do not believe you are of such low intelligence to personally believe what you are trying to sell.

I give you more credit.

 

Have a good one.

[ClutchClark]

When does obama plan to return the remaining $1.3B he has now indicated we rightfully owe Iran ?

 

When I see that payment made in full then I will give a little more credit to this fabrication.

 

Until then, it looks like obama dug up some old long forgotten debt to cover his tracks. if this debt was legitimate then why was it not part of the Iran-Contra ransom for the original Iran hostage crisis? Why has Iran not attempted to collect before now?

 

Currently it sounds alot like the claim that an anti-muslim video is responsible for Beghazi.

Edited August 5, 2016 by ClutchClark

[ClutchClark]

Lets see, the Iranian Revolution deposed our US-installed Shah in 1979.

 

This "alleged" debt goes back to an arms deal brokered under the Shah when Iran was still friendly to US interests.

 

Why did the US not pay for this deal when it was made in the early 70's and when the Shah would have expected it?

 

 

[PTC]

3 hours ago, ClutchClark said:

Please fact check me but CNN reported that this $400 million in cash was delivered to Iran within a couple of hours of the hostages being flown out of the country.

 

Why was this money sent through this difficult to trace method and not wired from a US Govt account into an Iranian Gov't account through a neutral 3rd Party Country IF it was all above board for some other debt? 

 

Why did Iranian leadership immediately parade this payment to its population as a "ransom"?

 

And where was Clinton during this time frame and negotiation?

 

I guess this is representative of the low information anti-Obama set when they don't even understand the details of the US sanctions on Iran. So the champions of individual freedoms and laws would have their President breaking US law? Must be comforting to believe that your own views are always correct.

[PTC]

1 hour ago, Boon Mee said:

Bottom line boys...even if Barry gets up and lies for what was it - 7 min that it wasn't a ransom payment, we all know it was.

Didn't pass the "Duck" test no way, no how...

 

Breitbart a bit slow on the memo today with the talking points on Trumps abysmal showing in the latest polls? So have to go for what the fringe right nits believe is the low hanging fruit? Of course that fruit has been hanging there since January.

 

You appear to need assistance with your omithology. May I suggest adding google to your bookmarks.

 

Look forward to your return to the Trump threads. You are one of the few who now remain.

Edited August 5, 2016 by PTC

[Silurian]

54 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

If we have now admitted that we owe $1.7 billion for this 40 year old arms deal then why was the entire amount not paid back?

 

Why $400M under the table at this very moment that hostages were released? And as you already mentioned earlier, Iran taking US hostages suggests the only group wanting to move forward in peace is obama.

 

But this discussion has moved away from the actual topic--$400 million in Euros paid to our enemy, Iran, within hours of Iran releasing American citizens they had taken as hostage.

 

On the one hand you argue it was not a ransom but only a poorly timed debt repayment and on the other hand you attempt to justify why a ransom was required...except it was not a ransom.

 

I do not believe you are of such low intelligence to personally believe what you are trying to sell.

I give you more credit.

 

Have a good one.

 

I don't think I attempted to justify it as a ransom but maybe it came across that way.

 

Let's take a look into what Trump might have said if the $400M was paid to Iran without any response from Iran. This is just for a bit of fun.

 

<alternate reality alert, not real, repeat not real>

Trump: "Can you believe Obama gave Iran $400M and didn't get anything back? Obama couldn't even get the hostages released. He is such a poor deal maker. If I made a deal with Iran, believe me, it would have been a great deal. I would have charged them $400M to hold their funds, got the hostages release with no conditions and had Iran pay me $400M as compensation for the inconvenience,"

<back to reality>

 

If you and others want to believe it was a ransom payment, that is your opinion. Until I see facts proving otherwise, I do believe this is a trust building exercise on both sides.

 

 

Edited August 5, 2016 by Silurian

[Chicog]

Seems to me that freeing four hostages by paying a ransom with their own money that they were going to get anyway was a rather smart trick.

 

[ClutchClark]

20 minutes ago, PTC said:

 

I guess this is representative of the low information anti-Obama set when they don't even understand the details of the US sanctions on Iran. So the champions of individual freedoms and laws would have their President breaking US law? Must be comforting to believe that your own views are always correct.

 

I do take some comfort when I am correct and I always attempt to educate myself prior to making a conclusion. That is why this post was my asking for clarification.

 

BTW, you missed the target with your response since you failed to address my wuestion in the least but rather to only use it as a platform to show hostility. 

 

Please do tell me more about the US sanctions and how making a large cash payment in the dark of night did not break those sanctions. 

 

Or you can just throw more name-calling around which seems to be all seversl of you here are capable of.

 

cheers

[ClutchClark]

8 minutes ago, Silurian said:

 

I don't think I attempted to justify it as a ransom but maybe it came across that way.

 

Let's take a look into what Trump might have said if the $400M was paid to Iran without any response from Iran. This is just for a bit of fun.

 

<alternate reality alert, not real, repeat not real>

Trump: "Can you believe Obama gave Iran $400M and didn't get anything back? Obama couldn't even get the hostages released. He is such a poor deal maker. If I made a deal with Iran, I would have charged them $400M to hold their funds, got the hostages release with no conditions and had Iran pay me $400M as compensation for the inconvenience,"

<back to reality>

 

If you and others want to believe it was a ransom payment, that is your opinion. Until I see facts proving otherwise, I do believe this is a trust building exercise on both sides.

 

 

 

Since I am not a Trump supporter lets leave Trump out of this.

 

I always prefer to desl with an actual occurance with the actual party involved than a hypothetical trying to rope in someone that had nothing to do with anything.

 

I expect more from you than such antics.

[PTC]

19 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

And, another pro-obama response that is only filled with hostility and name-calling and nothing about the subject of the thread.

 

Thank you for demonstrating the weakness of Boon Mee's position. He is lucky too have minions leaping so quickly to his defense. Sorry, but you are not going to get your moderators gold star this way. For the avoidance of doubt, you may not require anyone to respond or not to anything.

 

Please, continue to make this about me. Your schtick is now clear. Deflect anyone who refutes your pearls of wisdom and annoy them to death.

Edited August 5, 2016 by PTC

[Silurian]

20 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

Since I am not a Trump supporter lets leave Trump out of this.

 

I always prefer to desl with an actual occurance with the actual party involved than a hypothetical trying to rope in someone that had nothing to do with anything.

 

I expect more from you than such antics.

 

I didn't pull Trump's name out of the blue. His name was mention in the OP and several times in this thread. I was trying to point out how Trump along with several GOP members believe that any deal with Iran is a terrible one. My hypothetical is based on current beliefs held by Trump and other GOP members. Time and time again, these people try to tear apart any deal with Iran. How does this help trust building?

 

This wasn't antics. This was a attempt at humor to show how ridiculous Trump's (and other's) claims to be about the Iran deals. To me, Trump (and his ilk) would rather build walls than build trust.

[Pinot]

51 minutes ago, PTC said:

 

Thank you for demonstrating the weakness of Boon Mee's position. He is lucky too have minions leaping so quickly to his defense. Sorry, but you are not going to get your moderators gold star this way. For the avoidance of doubt, you may not require anyone to respond or not to anything.

 

Please, continue to make this about me. Your schtick is now clear. Deflect anyone who refutes your pearls of wisdom and annoy them to death.

 

See my post #18 for the key to dealing with CC.

 

 

 

[ClutchClark]

1 hour ago, PTC said:

 

Thank you for demonstrating the weakness of Boon Mee's position. He is lucky too have minions leaping so quickly to his defense. Sorry, but you are not going to get your moderators gold star this way. For the avoidance of doubt, you may not require anyone to respond or not to anything.

 

Please, continue to make this about me. Your schtick is now clear. Deflect anyone who refutes your pearls of wisdom and annoy them to death.

 

And yet another post from you absent anything to do with the topic.

 

Are you going to explain those sanctions to us that you suggested you know all about and we know nothing?

 

I would honestly like to know more about why $400 million cash payments to Iran are not against existing sanctions.

 

Thanks

Edited August 5, 2016 by ClutchClark

[TEFLKrabi]

3 hours ago, ClutchClark said:

 

OK. 

 

I am not offering an argument to you.

 

I just want to know if you genuinely believe this. 

 

I am just hoping to understand the mindset of my fellow Americans.

 

You honestly see this as a good bit of diplomacy and not a ransom payment?

 

OK...so how do you define a ransom payment?

 

When someone is kidnapped and a ransom payment is made, couldn't that also always be called just a "good bit of diplomacy"? 

 If the payment was solely for their release then it's a ransom payment. If their release was triggered by the return of the money then it's diplomacy. 

[ClutchClark]

1 hour ago, Silurian said:

 

I didn't pull Trump's name out of the blue. His name was mention in the OP and several times in this thread. I was trying to point out how Trump along with several GOP members believe that any deal with Iran is a terrible one. My hypothetical is based on current beliefs held by Trump and other GOP members. Time and time again, these people try to tear apart any deal with Iran. How does this help trust building?

 

This wasn't antics. This was a attempt at humor to show how ridiculous Trump's (and other's) claims to be about the Iran deals. To me, Trump (and his ilk) would rather build walls than build trust.

 

OK. Now I get what you are saying.

 

Its a common practice to hear obama supporters label anyone who has problems with obama as a Trump supporter. 

 

For me, this untimely $400M cash payment appears to be BS and that is my issue with it.

 

Not unlike the WMD of an earlier administration. 

 

As much as I dislike Trump--I do think its this dishonesty from the WH which helpa to fuel the anger for both Trump and Bernie supporters. 

 

 

Edited August 5, 2016 by ClutchClark

[phantomfiddler]

I honestly do believe that o,bama is on the side of the enemies of America. He is obviously a muslim, and doing everything he can to cause the downfall of what used to be a great nation !

[ClutchClark]

1 hour ago, Silurian said:

 

IMy hypothetical is based on current beliefs held by Trump and other GOP members. Time and time again, these people try to tear apart any deal with Iran. How does this help trust building?

 

 

 

It appears we have different agendas for the future.

 

I do not trust Iran nor will I ever trust Iran. Same as I don't trust Russia, China, North Korea, et al.

 

Something about their frequent street parades where 1,000's of them chant, "Death to America" just makes me skeptical of them.

 

The only positive I see of this relationship building effort with Iran is lower crude oil prices now that they can sell on the open market vs the black market deals of years past.

 

Have a good one.

[sirineou]

5 minutes ago, phantomfiddler said:

I honestly do believe that o,bama is on the side of the enemies of America. He is obviously a muslim, and doing everything he can to cause the downfall of what used to be a great nation !

Obviously a troll post , but out of curiosity, what is it that makes it obvious to you that he is a Muslim?

and even if he was, as a Muslim , why would he be doing everything he can to cause the downfault of the US?

 

Iran gave us that money to buy stuff from us, we did not give them the stuff. they asked for their money back, we did not give them the money back, they took as to court and won. We gave them their money back.

So simple even a non Muslim like you should understand.

[sirineou]

5 minutes ago, phantomfiddler said:

I honestly do believe that o,bama is on the side of the enemies of America. He is obviously a muslim, and doing everything he can to cause the downfall of what used to be a great nation !

Obviously a troll post , but out of curiosity, what is it that makes it obvious to you that he is a Muslim?

and even if he was, as a Muslim , why would he be doing everything he can to cause the downfault of the US?

 

Iran gave us that money to buy stuff from us, we did not give them the stuff. they asked for their money back, we did not give them the money back, they took as to court and won. We gave them their money back.

So simple even a non Muslim like you should understand.

[Boon Mee]

Plane With Hostages Was Held And Not Allowed To Leave Iran, Until ‘Other Plane’ First Landed

Gee, what could have been in the other plane they were waiting for? Surely not ransom!

 

"One of the Americans released by Iran on the same day $400 million in cash was paid by the U.S. government to the Iranian government says the plane they flew out on was held up for several hours waiting for another plane to land first.

Christian Pastor Saeed Abedini told Fox Business Network’s Trish Regan on Thursday that he was taken out of his prison cell and brought to the airport in Tehran, where a plane was waiting for him and other freed American prisoners"

.http://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/742212?section=Newsfront&keywords=pastor-saeed-abedini-hostage-plane&year=2016&month=08&date=04&id=742212&aliaspath=%2FManage%2FArticles%2FTemplate-Main&oref=www.google.com

[Boon Mee]

Obama Spends 7 Minutes Dodging On Whether Iran Will Use $400 Million To Fund Terrorism

 

 

 

What a traitor, eh?

Why did I-Ran demand it get cash you ask yourself?

Right...

[Silurian]

21 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

It appears we have different agendas for the future.

 

I do not trust Iran nor will I ever trust Iran. Same as I don't trust Russia, China, North Korea, et al.

 

Something about their frequent street parades where 1,000's of them chant, "Death to America" just makes me skeptical of them.

 

The only positive I see of this relationship building effort with Iran is lower crude oil prices now that they can sell on the open market vs the black market deals of years past.

 

Have a good one.

 

I am sorry to hear that you will never trust Iran. Have you ever personally met anyone from Iran? I had a couple of Iranian students in a Thai language class that I was taking years ago. At first I was apprehensive to talk with them due to American-Iranian relationship issues. But after getting to know them and several long discussions, I realized that they are quite a friendly and peaceful people. From what they told me is that younger Iranians want a closer and respectful relationship with Americans. They love Levi jeans and many other western iconic fashions. A lot of those street parades you mention took place in the late 70's when Iran kicked the Shah out of Iran (who was placed there by the US). Granted there is still some American hatred that still plays on Iranian TV but it is limited and typically backed by a small group of zealots. Just as there are a faction of American people that parade around hating on various races.

 

I have delved into why America and Iran have such a long confrontational history. It is something that the American population mostly believes was due to racial or religious hatred but this is really not the case. It goes back at least 60 years ago when the US thought it could nation build Iran the way it wanted. Then exploding in the late 70's with the Iranian revolution. Actually during the 50's, 60's and early 70's, Iran was a tourist destination for Americans and Iran sent students to study in the US. I would like to see both America and Iran get back to a time where there was this mutual trust.

 

 

[Boon Mee]

It's really very simple why the civilized world doesn't trust Iran.  They are the #1 supporters of Terrorism.  Hezzbola etc - they are the enemy full stop...

[Silurian]

48 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

The only positive I see of this relationship building effort with Iran is lower crude oil prices now that they can sell on the open market vs the black market deals of years past.

 

 

Oh, by the way. A positive to Iranian relations is the fact that Iran is also fighting ISIS. I think someone of the GOP variety stated that we need to get the Gulf countries to assist in the fight against ISIS. Seems they overlooked Iran. Probably since Saudi Arabia hates Iran. If you ask me who I don't trust...I don't trust Saudi Arabia. Ask where some of the terrorist money comes from, you will find some trails lead to Saudi Arabia.