T1B

This morning brings fresh video of our sailors on their knees with their hands behind their heads capitulating to Iranian Republican Guards. Instead of lighting those ragheads up for daring to approach our boats, shooting off missiles within 1500 yards of our aircraft carrier, and for flagrantly firing ballistic rockets in the face of the wondrous nuke deal our president so skillfully wrought, we see the United States humiliated on the very night of the State of the Union address.

You just can't make this stuff up. This coming year can't go by fast enough so that this cancer can be finally excised from the body politic.

The whole narrative that our boats accidentally drifted into Iranian waters due to mechanical issues. I assume these were patrol boats similar to the ones my reserve unit operates. They have more than one engine and even if both fail, the other boat could easily tow the disabled one.

My guess is that what really happened is that the Iranians just saw these guys alone and decided to grab them, knowing damn well that they didn't have the authority to fire back. We have plenty of firepower in the area and could have defended these guys if they weren't handcuffed by our nutless prez.

I'm sure all sensitive communications equipment was destroyed and there was no compromise of intelligence activities, right?

I would guess they had time enough to zero out the crypto in their radios and possibly toss them in the drink or smash them.

I doubt the Iranians get any benefit out of this. Nothing like that spy plane we gift wrapped and handed over to the chinks a while back. They got all sorts of cool shit there.

The Iranians can get anything they want from the Israelis...probably much cheaper, too.

Wholesale pricing. Can't beat it.

smackaholic wrote:The whole narrative that our boats accidentally drifted into Iranian waters due to mechanical issues. I assume these were patrol boats similar to the ones my reserve unit operates. They have more than one engine and even if both fail, the other boat could easily tow the disabled one.

My guess is that what really happened is that the Iranians just saw these guys alone and decided to grab them, knowing damn well that they didn't have the authority to fire back. We have plenty of firepower in the area and could have defended these guys if they weren't handcuffed by our nutless prez.

Yep. Best to always come out with guns blazing.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael wrote:The Iranians can get anything they want from the Israelis...probably much cheaper, too.

Wholesale pricing. Can't beat it.

Wholesale for goyim? Oy, that's meshugge. You have to know people to get wholesale.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/42 ... egal-image

Here is a concise article of what happened and how the Iranians and the US responded. Just horrible.

Serious question: Who has the authorization to release the $150+ billion to the Iranians? Does that fall under the House of Representatives as the holders of the purse strings or the Senate as the ratifier of treaties or the President? Does Congress have any control over the release of the money? I've seen nothing on the web that explains the division of power in this regard.

Rooster wrote:http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/42 ... egal-image

Here is a concise article of what happened and how the Iranians and the US responded. Just horrible.

Actually your article contains almost no information at all about "what happened." Do you even know how to read?

Just horrible.

smackaholic wrote:I would guess they had time enough to zero out the crypto in their radios and possibly toss them in the drink or smash them.

I doubt the Iranians get any benefit out of this. Nothing like that spy plane we gift wrapped and handed over to the chinks a while back. They got all sorts of cool shit there.

A senior US administration official told CNN's Jim Sciutto that there's nothing to indicate anything hostile on the part of Iran. Administration officials also reportedly said that releasing the sailors at night would be "unsafe."

Another US official, however, told CNN's Barbara Starr that the IRGC confiscated the sailors' communications equipment, which is hostile.

http://www.businessinsider.com/two-us-n ... ody-2016-1

Cell phones?

Mikey wrote:

smackaholic wrote:The whole narrative that our boats accidentally drifted into Iranian waters due to mechanical issues. I assume these were patrol boats similar to the ones my reserve unit operates. They have more than one engine and even if both fail, the other boat could easily tow the disabled one.

My guess is that what really happened is that the Iranians just saw these guys alone and decided to grab them, knowing damn well that they didn't have the authority to fire back. We have plenty of firepower in the area and could have defended these guys if they weren't handcuffed by our nutless prez.

Yep. Best to always come out with guns blazing.

You're right, mikey. It's always better to just lay down like a little bitch and beg forgiveness, lest they get mad and be forced into further hostile actions against us.

Any gun blazing needed should have taken place well before our ships were boarded. This really wouldn't be much of a fight if we took the gloves off. And the Iranians aren't stupid. They would back off very quickly.

OK Rambo, you're obviously the expert here. I'll defer from now on to your vast experience in military strategery and diplomacy.

These guys were apparently operating under faulty rules of engagement, personally handed down to them by Obama, which they should have known to ignore because their President and SOS are both serial pussies. Besides, firing weapons from a boat that's dead in the water is known to be a really smart thing to do.

A real commander in chief can't be here any too soon.

Wolfman wrote:A real commander in chief can't be here any too soon.

I know what you mean. This impostor isn't even a real Negroe.

By that response may I presume to put you down as a confirmed vote for Ben Carson then, Mikey?

Ok, I found a partial answer to my own question of who has control of Iranian assets. Apparently the vast majority of the money is being held in escrow in Asian banks after various oil buys stemming from our 2012 sanctions against Iran. However, there are other millions that have been held from sales of military equipment to the Shah in 1979 to things such as the rental of the Washington DC Iranian embassy in the subsequent years. These funds have been held by the Pentagon and the State Department.

The oil money was caught in the banks after energy buys that occur over relatively long lengths of time, all placed in accounts that the buyers and sellers have access to for the deal. These monies were caught and then frozen due to the stroke the Fed has in the global banking business and causing the Asian banks to lock these funds up for fear of angering the US government and possibly suffering from financial penalties or reduced/cancelled access to US markets.

So, "rooster," what exactly is it that has your panties in a wad concerning Iran having their own money returned to them? Iran hasn't attacked anyone since Darius II, and the notion that its leadership will immediately launch a nuclear attack is so ludicrous that no one outside of the GOP would even consider it. And let's be clear, by maintaining your rabid crisis approach to Iran, you're thus supporting our "allies" in Saudi Arabia and Tel Aviv. And really, try and consider just which of those two entities is more criminal, destructive, and doomed.

Meanwhile, for your consideration as to just why American "sailors" are sneaking around in the Persian Gulf in the first place.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbsZjW-m0x8

WW

Mikey wrote: These guys were apparently operating under faulty rules of engagement, personally handed down to them by Obama, which they should have known to ignore because their President and SOS are both serial pussies. Besides, firing weapons from a boat that's dead in the water is known to be a really smart thing to do.

It's almost like these shitstains are rooting for sailors to die, just so they can scream FUCK YOU OBUMMER and wave their fists one more time in pathetic defiance while dreaming of bombing the shit out of some rag heads.

Embarrassing.

Why am I against Iran? I am opposed to them having any means by which they can continue to fund Hamas, Hezbollah, Syrian rebels, Assad, ISIS, Al Qaeda, the PLO, the Muslim Brotherhood... have I missed anybody? While they may not directly finance some of those I mentioned, it serves Iran's interests to foment unrest in the Middle East because with the United States withdrawing from the region Iran has been right there behind us filling the power vacuum. I also carry a grudge against them for killing US troops in A-stan. I hold it against them that they introduced MANPADs into the theater while I was flying there. I vividly remember the hostage crisis. I resent them saying "Death to the Great Satan! Death to America!" even as we give them the green light to build nukes, rebuild their economy, and further threaten all of their neighbors.

What do I like about Iran? I appreciate the rugs they make. I own six of them, there is nothing in the world which approaches the quality of their rugs. I use the Iranian 100 rial note as my business card. It makes me grin every time I hand one out with the Ayatollah's mug glaring at the recipient. I like the Iranian people. They are loyal, hard working, pragmatists stuck with a shitty government. If given the opportunity, I believe they'd overthrow their overlords and return to a society that reflects the one in which the Shah ruled.

It irritates me to no end Obama's ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Like Cuba, Afghanistan, Iraq, and a thousand other places across the globe, he has an uncanny ability to take a winning hand and throw it away for a loser. Iran was on the verge of collapsing due to economic destruction and our Idiot in Chief has breathed fresh life into a corrupt and rotting regime. Case in point, I can use rials as a business card because when I bought a couple of bricks of them it took roughly 80,000 rials to buy a dollar. It got worse-- the rate went past 100,000, so in essence I got a raw deal. It is now at 30,000:1 thanks to Obama. So to address your question directly, giving Iran whatever money they supposedly own just facilitates all the stuff they have been encouraging. Isn't that enough of a reason?

I love it.

I remember a British patrol boat being interred in (2006?) for the same reason. They were released within a week after much knashing of teeth. All that happened was they were treated well and released without uniform, they all had briliiantly tailored suits issued to them by the Iranians. Looked like Resevior Dogs.




The media tried to find fault and one of the sailors said his captors called him Mr. Bean.

Sort of makes you miss the NVA :(

Rooster wrote:By that response may I presume to put you down as a confirmed vote for Ben Carson then, Mikey?

Ben is the man.

Ben is an opiated loon. Or at least that's his bearing.

As for "rooster" 's inane imitation of a right-wing troll, the entire "ISIS" configuration sponsored and trained by the Saudi/CIA/Mossad alliance is directly focused on the undermining of Iran. That is its only purpose. So, if you're really against terrorism, start fighting the Saudis, the Zionists, and the neocon (dual citizen) fanatics in the U.S. (who have successfully hijacked the government and media...yikes)

WW

Rooster wrote:Why am I against Iran? I am opposed to them having any means by which they can continue to fund Hamas, Hezbollah, Syrian rebels, Assad, ISIS, Al Qaeda, the PLO, the Muslim Brotherhood...

Isis and AQ both consider Shiites to be apostates. You really think Iran is funding them?

BSmack wrote:

Rooster wrote:Why am I against Iran? I am opposed to them having any means by which they can continue to fund Hamas, Hezbollah, Syrian rebels, Assad, ISIS, Al Qaeda, the PLO, the Muslim Brotherhood...

Isis and AQ both consider Shiites to be apostates. You really think Iran is funding them?

Rooster just channels the most rabid of the Obama haters. Throw as much shit as you can make up against the wall, not worrying about how ridiculous most of it is, and maybe some will stick. The most gullible will believe all of it.

You'll note that I specifically said that while Iran may not directly finance these various groups, it serves their interests to increase unrest and destabilize neighboring governments in a bid to increase their own influence. Certainly this is not a difficult concept to grasp, is it? What is surprising to me is that LTS, Mikey, and BSmack don't seem to understand this very basic premise. However, it is illuminating that these three are in agreement. Lying down with dogs and getting up with fleas and all that...

You're not going to change minds any more than make them stop rooting for a certain sport's team. They would look at say Hillary Clinton's or Bernie Sander's resumes and compare them to say Ted Cruz, and still believe that Hillary or Bernie will make the better president.

So Iran is funding both Assad and the Syrian rebels?

Wolfman wrote:You're not going to change minds any more than make them stop rooting for a certain sport's team. They would look at say Hillary Clinton's or Bernie Sander's resumes and compare them to say Ted Cruz, and still believe that Hillary or Bernie will make the better president.

So, Ted Cruz is the "real Commander in Chief" that you've been pining for?

Of all the potential candidates, on either side, he's the one I'd most like to punch in the face.

My God what a phony, pathetic huckster. You're as gullible as Rooster

Plus he just looks like someone who wears lipstick in his alone time

Sudden Sam wrote:Cruz is a nutcase.

He would have to believe the crap he spouts first. He doesn't. Trump had him pegged. There aren't any Cuban evangelicals. He's just another greasy Ivy League scumbag like the last four presidents and his wife works for Goldman Sachs. Oh yes, GS also loaned him money for his senate campaign...which he "forgot" to disclose. An honest mistake I'm sure.

10 reasons that Goldman Sachs loan is a nightmare for Ted Cruz

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ri ... &tid=ss_tw

Shillary is only candidate slimier than Cruz in the race.

All that won't matter to Cruz's core supporters. He's not a hypocrite, he's exceptional. And besides, God wanted him to get those loans.

Also, who else will carpet bomb ISIS in the name of our Good Lord and Savior?

He is only a fraction of the sleeze that is Hillary.

Left Seater wrote:He is only a fraction of the sleeze that is Hillary.