Iran has 10 US Sailors from 2 small boats

[JohnR]

They may have suffered mechanical breakdown on one and drifted into territorial waters surrounding an Iranian island in the middle of the Gulf

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/13/wo...=tw-share&_r=0

"It was unclear how contact with the boats had been lost, and Navy officials in Washington said they were trying to determine what had happened. One official said the two vessels had failed to make a scheduled rendezvous with a larger ship to refuel."

I have difficulty understanding why even if one failed there was no tow and they would allow themselves to drift. Unless they both ran out ?? Smells fishy.

[Nebe]

Sounds to me like it was a test
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Didn't this happen to the Brits a few years ago? Iran isn't going to hurt them and the last thing you want to do is make it a big deal which is what they want. Idiot on MSNBC is stomping his feet insisting Obama should make demands his speech tonight. Duh...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

send Obama in to rescue them...

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

send Obama in to rescue them...

You should reflect on what your post really says...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

all were released as of 0500 BBC Check out a map they were heading from kuwait to bahrain and got picked up around the farsi Islands .. 2 small boats running at High speed who approved that route ?? No reason for the Iran to detain the crews but their armed forces act independent of their Government most of the time

Sounds like a little cat and mouse didn't go as planned the out come could have been worse

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

You should reflect on what your post really says...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't know what you think it says in Spence context(and don't really care) but I bet you get a chubby and dreamily fantasize that Obama could have been a great fighter pilot when you look at that picture...

[Raven]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Smells fishy.

it was a FISHEY Test

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

send Obama in to rescue them...

LMAO!!

Glad it ended well.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Idiot on MSNBC is stomping his feet insisting Obama should make demands his speech tonight. Duh...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's not an astute demand to make.

Spence, how about the fact that the Pakistani doctor that helped us get Bin Laden is still in a Pakistani prison? And we still send tons of cash to Pakistan? Obama couldn't make THAT deal? He couldn't threaten to hold up payments until the guy was released?

When we elect a POTUS who has never done anything in the real world, who has spent his entire life in Ivy League faculty rooms, this is what you get. If you were directing a sitcom for TV, and you wanted to cast an uber-liberal Ivy League professor to show that education doesn't equate to real-life problem-solving ability, you couldn't come up with a better character than Obama, he is right out of central casting.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by wdmso

all were released as of 0500 BBC Check out a map they were heading from kuwait to bahrain and got picked up around the farsi Islands .. 2 small boats running at High speed who approved that route ?? No reason for the Iran to detain the crews but their armed forces act independent of their Government most of the time

Sounds like a little cat and mouse didn't go as planned the out come could have been worse

A lot of fail in the planning and perhaps execution of this little cruise. Plus Murphy (and the Iranians) gets a vote.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by scottw

send Obama in to rescue them...

Anybody else humming the "Wicked Witch of the West" theme from the Wizard of Oz in their head when they saw that pic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Our sailers surrendering must have been humiliating . Watching the captain apologizing was infuriating.
100 billion on the line so they let them go . Very sad
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Our sailers surrendering must have been humiliating . Watching the captain apologizing was infuriating.
100 billion on the line so they let them go . Very sad
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Oh please. I hope you didn't give yourself a hernia faking that outrage.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Oh please. I hope you didn't give yourself a hernia faking that outrage.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That hurt ... Think I'll whip up some fake tears
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by buckman

Our sailers surrendering must have been humiliating . Watching the captain apologizing was infuriating.
100 billion on the line so they let them go . Very sad
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I wouldn't call what they did as a Surrender I am sure if we stopped to Iranian Gun boats off block Island we wouldn't have just called Sea tow

But as for the Sailor in the interview not sure why he did it he may have ended his career if he made that call .. not saying he needed to stick to the name rank and serial number line

something maybe like yea we broke down and we have been treated well and thats it

[scottw]

[QUOTE=wdmso;1091058]

I wouldn't call what they did as a Surrender

[Nebe]

What is the big deal if someone said "sorry" ? While there is probably more to the story as to why the navy was in Iranian waters, the fact is that they were. I'd say sorry too... Wouldn't you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

[QUOTE=scottw;1091060]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I wouldn't call what they did as a Surrender

Not at all.. you need to be at war to surrender this just allows the right to keep up how weak the US is story line .. they same line was used when we left Yemen "We’re surrendering around the world, we’re surrendering our embassy, and now we’re asking U.S. Marines to surrender their dignity, give up oaths that they made, creeds that they live by, and surrender their rifle,"

Real world Reality's need not apply .. what do you suppose they should have done ? shoot it out?

> do you think if we boarded an armed Iranian gun boat

We wouldn't want their hands up where we could see them..
for Our mens safety

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Nebe

What is the big deal if someone said "sorry" ? While there is probably more to the story as to why the navy was in Iranian waters, the fact is that they were. I'd say sorry too... Wouldn't you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

that statement from an individual my appear harmless

"Sorry" is an admission of Guilt.. But Because he wears the Uniform of the United States Navy His statements can be used as a propaganda both home and abroad ..

As it all ready is by the Iranians and American Conservatives Who are more alike than either one cares to admit

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

that statement from an individual my appear harmless

"Sorry" is an admission of Guilt.. But Because he wears the Uniform of the United States Navy His statements can be used as a propaganda both home and abroad ..

As it all ready is by the Iranians and American Conservatives Who are more alike than either one cares to admit

You are a hater. You hate on Conservatives on most of your posts. You just twisted what you say can be used as propaganda as being something Conservatives are doing, but you just used it as nasty propaganda yourself. You are more like the Iranians than you care to admit.

[spence]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Not at all.. you need to be at war to surrender this just allows the right to keep up how weak the US is story line ..

I've seen surrender, hostage, hijack...

Perhaps people should revisit the idea that it looks like the Navy 'effed up and we violated their territory. It's shocking, shocking to see the Iranians detain them briefly to ensure they're not spies, give them what looked to be a nice meal and let them go.

Certainly this can only represent the insane weakness the USA currently projects.

Are we going to stand for this?

[Nebe]

What if the Hawks in the upper sphere of the navy sent these guys to get caught to provoke further action ? What if they figured this would turn into a hostage situation and pull us into Syria and another Iraq war situation? That's how I see this as a possible explanation for why they were caught in Iranian waters. However, I could be totally off base.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Gulf of Tonkin (sp?). Remember that ? Was that not a bunch of shenanigans ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Ah.. Yes.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I've seen surrender, hostage, hijack...

http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripert...0&d=1452784156

Take a bunch of words out of context and a bunch of ugly unflattering photos, and laugh at it. Sounds like the business model for MSNBC News.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You are a hater. You hate on Conservatives on most of your posts. You just twisted what you say can be used as propaganda as being something Conservatives are doing, but you just used it as nasty propaganda yourself. You are more like the Iranians than you care to admit.

Far from a hater I am an Independent If my name was Trump you would applaud me for not being politically correct and calling it as I see it

But because I see the World differently then you I became a default Hater .. My comments are not provided to me Via email facebook or some blogger .. I am sorry you feel the pointing out reality over fantasy is Me using propaganda

adjective
1.
holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.
synonyms: traditionalist, traditional, conventional, orthodox, old-fashioned, dyed-in-the-wool, hidebound, unadventurous, set in one's ways; More
noun
1.
a person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in relation to politics.
synonyms: right-winger, reactionary, rightist, diehard; More

This is How Iran and US conservatives have more in common than you wish to acknowledge... Never said they are the Same only there are similarities.. it easier to see with a World view Then a partisan world View "Surrender" Another example that every Bass is a 50Lber

[spence]

Originally Posted by Nebe

What if the Hawks in the upper sphere of the navy sent these guys to get caught to provoke further action ? What if they figured this would turn into a hostage situation and pull us into Syria and another Iraq war situation? That's how I see this as a possible explanation for why they were caught in Iranian waters. However, I could be totally off base.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think you could be right here. I was listening to Monica Crawly on the radio last night and she was hammering Obama for how the Iranians exploited his impotence and ridiculed him by timing the capture of our sailors on the day of his State of the Union Address. She was articulate, she was passionate, she was very convincing.

Not just pause, and let that sink in for a bit......

[Nebe]

No need to let it sink in. False flag with a broken halyard.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Far from a hater I am an Independent

How does being a so-called "Independent" absolve you from being a hater? Independents can't be haters?

If my name was Trump you would applaud me for not being politically correct and calling it as I see it

I know Donald Trump. You're no Donald Trump. (Just kidding--I've enjoyed using some "liberal" tricks in the last few posts just for fun).

When have I applauded Donald Trump? Does being a so-called "independent" give you the clairvoyant ability to know what I think of Donald Trump?

Then, maybe you and the Donald are more alike than you care to admit. You both call it "as you see it." And you both assume (or pretend) that you know a lot of stuff that you don't. Is that a mark of an "independent"--falsely assuming things?

Are you politically correct? Is that a good or bad thing? Or dependent on which politics you're being correct about? Did you come up with the concept of "politically correct" on your independent own? Or was it provided to you Via email Facebook or some blogger? Or some TV show, or some "independent" article?

But because I see the World differently then you I became a default Hater ..

How do you know how I see the world? I replied to several of your comments as a form of dialogue. You didn't seem to want to discuss most of what I said. I even invited you to dialogue in one post. You didn't reply. Apparently not interested. How do you know how someone actually sees the world If you don't actually have a dialogue, but merely expound or counter with what you consider "independent" opinions which don't actually address my discussion, but go on about how Conservatives are bad as in "Why are Conservatives afraid of everything thing and any one who is not like them!! That[s] the Real threat to America".

I think, from some of what you've said, that you and I do see the world alike in some, probably many, ways. But I think we differ mainly (aside from your unfounded ad hominem attacks on Conservatives) on the viability of the Constitution as it was written and intended. You really seemed convinced that it is a living breathing thing, at least metaphorically, (which it obviously is not) that must change to suit new times. (That "living breathing notion, BTW, is not an independent view, but specifically expressed in that exact way by Progressives and fostered by them in their anti-constitutional ideology). You don't seem to consider how and why it actually does suit new times because of the way it is structured. Those of the "living, breathing" persuasion avoid that discussion in any honest sense, but fall back on the ridiculous notion that it's old and must by that metric be outdated and inappropriate for current conditions. I suppose, by that standard, human DNA is outdated and should be replaced by something new. Or, that Shakespeare, or Homer, being so ancient, have nothing to say about the human condition of today because they didn't have airplanes, nuclear weapons, or ISIS.

I think that, if you and I have a dialogue on the matter, I might be able to demonstrate, even to your satisfaction, that the Constitution as it was written and intended is as relevant today as it was at its inception. And that it is not now, as "interpreted" and practiced or avoided, the same as the original Constitution (even though the exact language has not changed). And that changing its structural foundation over time resulted in many different successive Constitutions over that time, which is why I asked you which Constitution you swore allegiance to. And, by that change, that at its core, the relation of the individual to the government, has been reversed.

I'm not sure what an "independent" really is. They, when it comes time to vote, choose one side or another. I don't know what they are "independent" of. I guess they, to some degree, swing both ways. But do they have a way of their own, or are they dependent on the sides they are independent from?

I don't have my own way. I am, basically, an original constitutionalist. That doesn't make me a Republican or Democrat. But neither am I independent.


My comments are not provided to me Via email facebook or some blogger .. I am sorry you feel the pointing out reality over fantasy is Me using propaganda

You fail to see how, just as Iranians, and (as you see it) "Conservatives" are similar in how they could use the "reality" of what happened as propaganda, you, as well used the "reality" of that comparison as propaganda to equate Iranians and "Conservatives." Which makes you like them as well.

adjective
1.
holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.
synonyms: traditionalist, traditional, conventional, orthodox, old-fashioned, dyed-in-the-wool, hidebound, unadventurous, set in one's ways; More
noun
1.
a person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in relation to politics.
synonyms: right-winger, reactionary, rightist, diehard; More

Do you realize that we have been under the growing sway of a Progressive form of government longer than we were under an originalist form? That Progressivism has become the traditional "values and attitudes," and typically so, especially, in relation to politics. Would it, by that definition, make Progressives "right wingers"? "diehard"? And all that other stuff?

See, this is how you're (in my "World view") blind to the paradox that it is the original Constitution which is truly capable of evolving yet maintaining its fundamental relation of sovereign citizen to servant government, and that the Progressive "living and breathing" version is actually an eradication of that fundamental relation, and rather than evolving, Progressivism not only replaces constitutional government, but retrogresses to that truly ancient form of government which makes the citizen a servant of sovereign government

This is why you don't see the paradox of what we refer to now as "liberals" not really being liberal, but, in politics, dictatorial. And how those who we refer to as "conservatives" (of the original Constitution) are truly liberal. I invite you to a dialogue on that if you don't see my point.

This is How Iran and US conservatives have more in common than you wish to acknowledge... Never said they are the Same only there are similarities.. it easier to see with a World view Then a partisan world View "Surrender" Another example that every Bass is a 50Lber

My friend, the similarity between us all, "Conservative, Liberal, Iranian," or anyone else is fundamentally greater than our differences. We are all human. That "similarity" makes us compatible in the most basic way. The artificial ways are all the difference. They are the basis for conflict, for different "World views." Partisan or otherwise.

But differences don't only breed conflict. They only do so when some differences are mandated over and against others. If we are free to express them without oppressing or denying others the same freedom, they give rise to human progress in our arts and sciences and even politics. In all things human--if we are free to express them without oppressing or denying others the same freedom. Freedom to express differences is a most powerful engine of evolution.

I believe original constitutionalism provides us with a governmental structure which guarantees that freedom in a purer more fundamental way than can Progressivism. We can agree to disagree, but that ends dialogue, and feeds into political wars which allows for continual erosion of our guarantee against being more and more subjected to that ancient system of governmental control. That control which opposes what is still the newest political concept--government by consent of the governed. And control is a most powerful engine of stagnation, lack of or hindering evolution.

The greatest difference between our constitutional system and benevolent dictatorship, is if the former is followed as intended, there is a GUARANTEE of rights and freedoms, but in benevolent dictatorship, there is no guarantee, only dependence and hope that government will allow us rights and freedoms.

BTW, saying you are a hater, as you apparently didn't notice, was just fun sarc by responding how others like Spence, PaulS, Eben, etc. have done (including saying apples and oranges, depends on context, and so on). I enjoyed the past few posts I made doing so. It was so easy. Didn't have to use logic, reasonable argument, present a thesis . . . just little, irritating, ride by's.