• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

State Dept admits: $400M payment was contingent on release of prisoners

JoeTrumps

JoeTrumps

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Messages
2,901
Reaction score
1,346
Location
Memphis
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
News from The Associated Press

In other words "ransom." Not that we already didn't know it. but left need not worry. media won't touch it. and the GOP are such pu~~ies at this point they won't lift a finger in protest.

just waiting for James Comey to announce "Extremely careless, yada yada yada..." and we all just move on. It will be up to future historians to judge Obama's decisions. Not the feckless, neutered people we have in power now.
 
I will say that withholding $400 million owed to Iran is different to me than paying them $400 million to release prisoners if that's really what happened. I honestly haven't followed this very closely though.
 
Anagram said:
I will say that withholding $400 million owed to Iran is different to me than paying them $400 million to release prisoners if that's really what happened. I honestly haven't followed this very closely though.
Click to expand...

There was never any evidence that the money was to pay off some sort of debt that Obama thinks he owes Iran.

A lot of people have to feel really stupid right now after heavily defending Obama's words that this was not a ransom.
 
It is funny how few responses there have been.

The other thread was full of responses defending Obama and the administration when they said it was not a ransom.
 
Mason66 said:
It is funny how few responses there have been.

The other thread was full of responses defending Obama and the administration when they said it was not a ransom.
Click to expand...

Liberals knew it was ransom. They just decided defending the Dear Leader was more important than the truth. Nothing new there.
 
Fletch said:
Liberals knew it was ransom. They just decided defending the Dear Leader was more important than the truth. Nothing new there.
Click to expand...

Where oh where have all the liberals gone..................................ohhhhhh where oh where can they be?
 
RetiredUSN said:
Where oh where have all the liberals gone..................................ohhhhhh where oh where can they be?
Click to expand...

They are waiting for Matthews and Maddow to tell them how to respond.
 
JoeTrumps said:
News from The Associated Press

In other words "ransom." Not that we already didn't know it. but left need not worry. media won't touch it. and the GOP are such pu~~ies at this point they won't lift a finger in protest.

just waiting for James Comey to announce "Extremely careless, yada yada yada..." and we all just move on. It will be up to future historians to judge Obama's decisions. Not the feckless, neutered people we have in power now.
Click to expand...

Okay. And? We all know Obama lies and we all know the State Department has also lied.
 
On the one hand, we have the hostages saying they were not allowed to leave until the money arrived.

On the other hand, we have the Obama administration first saying the money had nothing to do with the hostages...and then changing their story to not paying the money till the hostages were released.

Hmmm...now who should I believe?

Should I believe hostages that have no record of being liars? Or should I believe the Obama administration who have an extensive record of lying, changing their story and lying again?

I think I'll give my nod to the hostages.
 
Chillfolks said:
Do you support Obama negotiating with terrorists and paying a foreign government a ransom to release prisoners?
Click to expand...

...then lying about it. Don't forget that part. He even found time in his busy day to ridicule those who claimed it was ransom.
 
Chillfolks said:
Do you support Obama negotiating with terrorists and paying a foreign government a ransom to release prisoners?
Click to expand...

No. There's my answer.

Or do I need to wait for MSNBC to tell me what to think?
 
JoeTrumps said:
News from The Associated Press

In other words "ransom." Not that we already didn't know it. but left need not worry. media won't touch it. and the GOP are such pu~~ies at this point they won't lift a finger in protest.

just waiting for James Comey to announce "Extremely careless, yada yada yada..." and we all just move on. It will be up to future historians to judge Obama's decisions. Not the feckless, neutered people we have in power now.
Click to expand...

The lies that have come out from Obama including Hillary are the worst ever seen from a president and his administration. But it does not shake the liberal loyalist one bit. They like being lied to, avoiding the truth is much easier on their nervous system.
 
Just to make it more clear (from the story in the OP) :

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration said Thursday that a $400 million cash payment to Iran seven months ago was contingent on the release of a group of American prisoners.

It is the first time the U.S. has so clearly linked the two events, which critics have painted as a hostage-ransom arrangement.
Click to expand...
 
It was money we owed them, but we refused to pay it until hostages were released.
 
Deuce said:
It was money we owed them, but we refused to pay it until hostages were released.
Click to expand...
So every President and every congress from the Jimmy Carter era to the G. W. Bush era had it wrong all this time but Obama, in all his wisdom, saw the error in the American position that the US didn't owe this money to Iran and simply returned what was owed to Iran, contingent upon the release of hostages, and you see nothing wrong with this?

And you wonder why I consider you a religious leftist zealot?
 
Deuce said:
It was money we owed them, but we refused to pay it until hostages were released.
Click to expand...

There was no proof presented that the two situations were connected.

Now the administration is saying they are connected.

Please provide proof that the money was to pay the debt.

We already have the proof that the money was for the release of the hostages. Do you know what that is called?
 
GPS_Flex said:
So every President and every congress from the Jimmy Carter era to the G. W. Bush era had it wrong all this time but Obama, in all his wisdom, saw the error in the American position that the US didn't owe this money to Iran and simply returned what was owed to Iran, contingent upon the release of hostages, and you see nothing wrong with this?

And you wonder why I consider you a religious leftist zealot?
Click to expand...

He will go to the mat to defend Obama, even after the State Department has said he is a liar.
 
We all knew this was ransom, and the State Department pretty much admitted it today.

Withholding $400 million from Iran until they release our hostages is ransom, no matter how you slice it.

From a security standpoint, I worry about the precedent this sets. Iran now know we'll pay money to get back seized Americans. It could lead to an increase in kidnapping/hostage situations.
 
Gangplank said:
We all knew this was ransom, and the State Department pretty much admitted it today.

Withholding $400 million from Iran until they release our hostages is ransom, no matter how you slice it.

From a security standpoint, I worry about the precedent this sets. Iran now know we'll pay money to get back seized Americans. It could lead to an increase in kidnapping/hostage situations.
Click to expand...

They already took more.
 
GPS_Flex said:
So every President and every congress from the Jimmy Carter era to the G. W. Bush era had it wrong all this time but Obama, in all his wisdom, saw the error in the American position that the US didn't owe this money to Iran and simply returned what was owed to Iran, contingent upon the release of hostages, and you see nothing wrong with this?

And you wonder why I consider you a religious leftist zealot?
Click to expand...

I read that it was part of the nuclear agreement. But sure, make up whatever scenario you like and attack that. Anything to uphold your "zealot" fantasy.

And no, I have never wondered a thing about you because until this post I had long since forgotten you ever existed, much less ever cared what you think about ****.
 
I find it amusing that giving Iran it's own money is now considered ransom.

No one honestly thinks the timing of the money and release of prisoners was coincidental. Obviously it was not coincidental. But a ransom usually suggests paying your OWN money to get what you want, not paying someone money which is already theirs.

It's clear what happened. We had something of Iran's, they had something of ours, we made a deal and took care of it. Also, if I understand correctly, we were probably going to have to pay that money (and maybe more) to Iran, regardless of anything else, so essentially we made a deal and traded Iran it's own money that we were going to have to pay anyways and in return got Americans back on US soil.

That's not exactly a "ransom" in any traditional sense. I understand it makes a great political football, but the truth isn't really nearly as interesting.

This article was a pretty good read for being a quick read.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom