oldNslow wrote on 08/23/16 at 18:25:31:


Why should we have to follow their laws in their country?


--Steve

JoG: "The cheapness o f the thinking that Allowed you to say that is just astonishing. "

So you're not challenging the points made, but tell us of the disgust you feel, then go on to insults.

I won't tell you of the Iranians I stayed with on my travels, it might be a shock to you.

I was pointing out that your Govt has given constant warnings of travel to Iran for the last X-years.
This was to question the post by OnS which commented on the timing of these warnings:
"Suprise! Suprise! Couldn't have possibly seen that coming"

It's been there for years already.

PS. I've travelled and lived in the Middle East, my thinking comes from my experience.

LostArtist wrote on 08/24/16 at 18:35:43:


Huh..... Gee, that sounds like an insult.
Hey, I put up a few post, you want to respond to them?
Try the "WLM" show Jog how to give a constructive answer.

pg wrote on 08/24/16 at 19:01:18:


I visited my extended family in Southern California recently.
They are mostly Hispanic.
I shared how funny it was that some of them are voting for Trump...
They voted for Obama last time.
From watching the news, all of them Mexicans are suppose to be against Trump.....
Or so I thought.
Hovis and Bot chided me with retorting that doesn't mean squat, because it doesn't represent those Mexicans they know....
Go figger  

Paraquat wrote on 08/24/16 at 06:14:24:


because we said we would??  

well, we actually said we'd follow the verdict of a world court based in The Hague

here's the New York Times describing history, if you want to believe it or not, that's you

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/opinion/the-fake-400-million-iran-ransom-st...

"the money was part of a separate negotiation over funds the United States has owed Iran since its 1979 Islamic Revolution.

At that time, Washington froze Iranian assets in the United States, including money paid by Tehran for military hardware that the United States never delivered after its ally there, the shah, was overthrown. In 1981, the two countries agreed that a tribunal at The Hague would adjudicate the legal claims.

Sign Up for the Opinion Today Newsletter
Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, The Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.


The United States and Iran have wrestled with this issue for decades, but efforts to reach a settlement intensified once the two sides began work on the nuclear deal. Tribunal decisions are binding, and the administration concluded it would lose at The Hague; in addition to $400 million, Iran was seeking billions of dollars in accumulated interest."

either way, what does this matter, Neither Clinton nor Trump have ANYTHING to do with this deal.

Ray: "Hovis and Bot chided me with retorting that doesn't mean squat,"

Are you comparing visiting relatives in SoCal from maybe Washington state, to spending months in a different continent with a different religion, different language, working for the locals, learning a bit of their religion, based in the very 'heartland' that you guys call the 'Holy Land' ?

Ray, to be honest, I don't think you get 'proportional samples'...

PS. @pg. PM me  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Embassy_siege

"The people who you met Weren't the ones who are In the news. "

The people that the News told you about from 5000 miles away is more accurate?

Believe the News on US TV, or go there and live in the region.....

And Jog talks about sheep  

@Bot, they know how to cook lamb