I'd like to say I wonder what George Washington would have thought of Obama. But I can't because I already know.
Some people just don't get it. We exist today as a nation through the result of our battlefield victories. Not our surrenders. And not even our diplomacy. Had we at each critical point in our history chosen not to fight America would not exist as a nation.
Diplomacy is conducted through a position of strength, not weakness. And you don't negotiate with a weaker party by instead displaying your own weakness.
Diplomacy is like dog training. As the master or the stronger party I will reward you when you behave as I have trained you. But instead it's our sailors who sit and stay. While Obama heels as his Iranian masters walk him. Hopefully the next president will know that he is the master so the mullah dogs can be retrained.
Some people just don't get it. We exist today as a nation through the result of our battlefield victories. Not our surrenders. And not even our diplomacy. Had we at each critical point in our history chosen not to fight America would not exist as a nation.
Diplomacy is conducted through a position of strength, not weakness. And you don't negotiate with a weaker party by instead displaying your own weakness.
Diplomacy is like dog training. As the master or the stronger party I will reward you when you behave as I have trained you. But instead it's our sailors who sit and stay. While Obama heels as his Iranian masters walk him. Hopefully the next president will know that he is the master so the mullah dogs can be retrained.
Iran's Quick Release Of The American Sailors Is Diplomacy At Work
But hawks are telling a different story.
01/13/2016 01:17 pm ET | Updated 11 hours ago
WASHINGTON -- If Iranian officials holding 10 U.S. Navy sailors on Farsi Island this week was the the first test of U.S.-Iran relations in a post-nuclear deal environment, the outcome was vindicating for proponents of diplomacy between the two countries.
But you wouldn’t know it from listening to conservative hawks.
After Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps detained the sailors accused of crossing into Iranian waters on Tuesday night, nuclear deal critics crowed that the altercation was a huge embarrassment for President Barack Obama, who was scheduled to deliver his final State of the Union address hours later.
“Obama’s humiliatingly weak Iran policy is exposed again,” tweeted presidential candidate Gov. Jeb Bush (R-Fla.). Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) suggested the president may need to delay his speech in order to address Iran’s “pattern of aggravating action.” The event proceeded as scheduled, and Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) criticized Obama for failing to mention the Farsi Island incident. Notorious Iran fearmonger Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) called on the president to rip up the nuclear deal if the American sailors were not returned “immediately.”
The nuclear accord has so far been successful in compelling Iran to scale back its nuclear program, which was the Obama administration’s stated sole reason for entering the negotiations. Iran is currently ahead of schedule in dismantling key components of its nuclear program, as required by the July 14 agreement signed by Iran, the U.S. and five world powers. The International Atomic Energy Agency is expected to inspect Iran’s revamped and downsized nuclear infrastructure as early as this weekend. If it verifies that Iran is complying with the agreement, that will trigger widespread international sanctions relief.
It’s not entirely fair to use this week's incident to measure the success of the nuclear accord, which was never intended to resolve other issues between the U.S. and Iran -- of which there are many. However, even those who defended the Obama administration’s reasoning for keeping the nuclear deal separate from other issues hoped that increased diplomacy between the two nations would translate into greater cooperation on non-nuclear matters.
And it appears it has.
By Tuesday night, Reuters reported that Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif had assured U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry that the sailors would be returned promptly. Despite a lack of formal diplomatic relations, the two men had developed a functioning working relationship during months of intense negotiations over the nuclear agreement.
At 6:59 a.m. EST on Wednesday, Defense Secretary Ash Carter confirmed the American Navy sailors were back in U.S. hands -- approximately three hours before administration officials had projected they would be. The Americans were released “after it was realized that their entry into Iran’s territorial waters was unintentional,” Iranian state-run news channel IRINN announced.
“That this issue was resolved peacefully and efficiently is a testament to the critical role diplomacy plans in keeping our country safe, secure, and strong,” he said in a statement.
Zarif echoed that sentiment, tweeting, “Happy to see dialog and respect, not threats and impetuousness, swiftly resolved the sailors episode. Let’s learn from this latest example.”
Even though the American sailors and their boats were released unharmed after less than 24 hours in Iranian custody, steadfast Iran hawks remained convinced that the incident proved stable U.S.-Iran relations were possible.
Cotton, who on Tuesday said the U.S. should exit the nuclear deal if the sailors weren’t returned immediately, challenged U.S. officials' assertions that the 10 Navy sailors ended up in disputed territory as a result of mechanical malfunctions. During an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Wednesday, the senator said he found it hard to believe that the IRGC wasn’t involved in “plotting this in advance, all designed to humiliate the president, therefore the United States, just days before we’re about to release billions and billions of dollars in sanctions relief to Iran.”
Bloomberg View columnists Josh Rogin and Eli Lake wrote that even if Iran were to release the sailors quickly, “the incident is a significant escalation in the Persian Gulf. It shows that despite a nuclear agreement with the West, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps is willing to board U.S. vessels, take American soldiers into custody, and, according to CNN citing U.S. officials, confiscate the crew's communications and GPS equipment.”
The problem with this logic is that the IRGC was also willing to detain U.S. soldiers before the nuclear deal -- and this incident, unlike previous ones, was resolved rapidly and peacefully.
Compare these events to 2004, when six British Marines and two naval personnel who were part of a U.S.-led force in Iraq were seized by Iranian officials for allegedly crossing into Iranian waters. The British military personnel were freed three days later, but the Iranians confiscated their equipment, and put one of their rigid inflatable boats on display in a Tehran museum. Former Marine Scott Fallon, one of the detainees,recalled being handcuffed, blindfolded and subjected to a mock execution. The detainees were forced to apologize on Iranian television before they were released.
In 2007, Iranian forces seized 15 British military personnel in disputed waters between Iraq and Iran. The captives were treated considerably better than the 2004 group, but it still took 13 days to resolve the dispute.
But hawks are telling a different story.
01/13/2016 01:17 pm ET | Updated 11 hours ago
[*=left]
Jessica SchulbergForeign Affairs Reporter, The Huffington Post
WASHINGTON -- If Iranian officials holding 10 U.S. Navy sailors on Farsi Island this week was the the first test of U.S.-Iran relations in a post-nuclear deal environment, the outcome was vindicating for proponents of diplomacy between the two countries.
But you wouldn’t know it from listening to conservative hawks.
After Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps detained the sailors accused of crossing into Iranian waters on Tuesday night, nuclear deal critics crowed that the altercation was a huge embarrassment for President Barack Obama, who was scheduled to deliver his final State of the Union address hours later.
“Obama’s humiliatingly weak Iran policy is exposed again,” tweeted presidential candidate Gov. Jeb Bush (R-Fla.). Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) suggested the president may need to delay his speech in order to address Iran’s “pattern of aggravating action.” The event proceeded as scheduled, and Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) criticized Obama for failing to mention the Farsi Island incident. Notorious Iran fearmonger Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) called on the president to rip up the nuclear deal if the American sailors were not returned “immediately.”
The nuclear accord has so far been successful in compelling Iran to scale back its nuclear program, which was the Obama administration’s stated sole reason for entering the negotiations. Iran is currently ahead of schedule in dismantling key components of its nuclear program, as required by the July 14 agreement signed by Iran, the U.S. and five world powers. The International Atomic Energy Agency is expected to inspect Iran’s revamped and downsized nuclear infrastructure as early as this weekend. If it verifies that Iran is complying with the agreement, that will trigger widespread international sanctions relief.
It’s not entirely fair to use this week's incident to measure the success of the nuclear accord, which was never intended to resolve other issues between the U.S. and Iran -- of which there are many. However, even those who defended the Obama administration’s reasoning for keeping the nuclear deal separate from other issues hoped that increased diplomacy between the two nations would translate into greater cooperation on non-nuclear matters.
And it appears it has.
By Tuesday night, Reuters reported that Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif had assured U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry that the sailors would be returned promptly. Despite a lack of formal diplomatic relations, the two men had developed a functioning working relationship during months of intense negotiations over the nuclear agreement.
At 6:59 a.m. EST on Wednesday, Defense Secretary Ash Carter confirmed the American Navy sailors were back in U.S. hands -- approximately three hours before administration officials had projected they would be. The Americans were released “after it was realized that their entry into Iran’s territorial waters was unintentional,” Iranian state-run news channel IRINN announced.
CREDIT: SEPAHNEWS/ASSOCIATED PRESS
The 10 U.S. sailors who were detained in Iran were released, unharmed, after less than 24 hours in captivity. Kerry, a former Navy sailor, thanked the Iranian government for its swift cooperation, and pointed to the painless resolution as the benefit of the gradually improving relations between U.S. and Iran.“That this issue was resolved peacefully and efficiently is a testament to the critical role diplomacy plans in keeping our country safe, secure, and strong,” he said in a statement.
Zarif echoed that sentiment, tweeting, “Happy to see dialog and respect, not threats and impetuousness, swiftly resolved the sailors episode. Let’s learn from this latest example.”
Even though the American sailors and their boats were released unharmed after less than 24 hours in Iranian custody, steadfast Iran hawks remained convinced that the incident proved stable U.S.-Iran relations were possible.
Cotton, who on Tuesday said the U.S. should exit the nuclear deal if the sailors weren’t returned immediately, challenged U.S. officials' assertions that the 10 Navy sailors ended up in disputed territory as a result of mechanical malfunctions. During an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Wednesday, the senator said he found it hard to believe that the IRGC wasn’t involved in “plotting this in advance, all designed to humiliate the president, therefore the United States, just days before we’re about to release billions and billions of dollars in sanctions relief to Iran.”
Bloomberg View columnists Josh Rogin and Eli Lake wrote that even if Iran were to release the sailors quickly, “the incident is a significant escalation in the Persian Gulf. It shows that despite a nuclear agreement with the West, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps is willing to board U.S. vessels, take American soldiers into custody, and, according to CNN citing U.S. officials, confiscate the crew's communications and GPS equipment.”
The problem with this logic is that the IRGC was also willing to detain U.S. soldiers before the nuclear deal -- and this incident, unlike previous ones, was resolved rapidly and peacefully.
Compare these events to 2004, when six British Marines and two naval personnel who were part of a U.S.-led force in Iraq were seized by Iranian officials for allegedly crossing into Iranian waters. The British military personnel were freed three days later, but the Iranians confiscated their equipment, and put one of their rigid inflatable boats on display in a Tehran museum. Former Marine Scott Fallon, one of the detainees,recalled being handcuffed, blindfolded and subjected to a mock execution. The detainees were forced to apologize on Iranian television before they were released.
In 2007, Iranian forces seized 15 British military personnel in disputed waters between Iraq and Iran. The captives were treated considerably better than the 2004 group, but it still took 13 days to resolve the dispute.
Iran's Quick Release Of The American Sailors Is Diplomacy At Work
But hawks are telling a different story.
01/13/2016 01:17 pm ET | Updated 11 hours ago
[*=left]
Jessica SchulbergForeign Affairs Reporter, The Huffington Post
WASHINGTON -- If Iranian officials holding 10 U.S. Navy sailors on Farsi Island this week was the the first test of U.S.-Iran relations in a post-nuclear deal environment, the outcome was vindicating for proponents of diplomacy between the two countries.
But you wouldn’t know it from listening to conservative hawks.
After Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps detained the sailors accused of crossing into Iranian waters on Tuesday night, nuclear deal critics crowed that the altercation was a huge embarrassment for President Barack Obama, who was scheduled to deliver his final State of the Union address hours later.
“Obama’s humiliatingly weak Iran policy is exposed again,” tweeted presidential candidate Gov. Jeb Bush (R-Fla.). Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) suggested the president may need to delay his speech in order to address Iran’s “pattern of aggravating action.” The event proceeded as scheduled, and Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) criticized Obama for failing to mention the Farsi Island incident. Notorious Iran fearmonger Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) called on the president to rip up the nuclear deal if the American sailors were not returned “immediately.”
The nuclear accord has so far been successful in compelling Iran to scale back its nuclear program, which was the Obama administration’s stated sole reason for entering the negotiations. Iran is currently ahead of schedule in dismantling key components of its nuclear program, as required by the July 14 agreement signed by Iran, the U.S. and five world powers. The International Atomic Energy Agency is expected to inspect Iran’s revamped and downsized nuclear infrastructure as early as this weekend. If it verifies that Iran is complying with the agreement, that will trigger widespread international sanctions relief.
It’s not entirely fair to use this week's incident to measure the success of the nuclear accord, which was never intended to resolve other issues between the U.S. and Iran -- of which there are many. However, even those who defended the Obama administration’s reasoning for keeping the nuclear deal separate from other issues hoped that increased diplomacy between the two nations would translate into greater cooperation on non-nuclear matters.
And it appears it has.
By Tuesday night, Reuters reported that Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif had assured U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry that the sailors would be returned promptly. Despite a lack of formal diplomatic relations, the two men had developed a functioning working relationship during months of intense negotiations over the nuclear agreement.
At 6:59 a.m. EST on Wednesday, Defense Secretary Ash Carter confirmed the American Navy sailors were back in U.S. hands -- approximately three hours before administration officials had projected they would be. The Americans were released “after it was realized that their entry into Iran’s territorial waters was unintentional,” Iranian state-run news channel IRINN announced.
CREDIT: SEPAHNEWS/ASSOCIATED PRESSThe 10 U.S. sailors who were detained in Iran were released, unharmed, after less than 24 hours in captivity. Kerry, a former Navy sailor, thanked the Iranian government for its swift cooperation, and pointed to the painless resolution as the benefit of the gradually improving relations between U.S. and Iran.
“That this issue was resolved peacefully and efficiently is a testament to the critical role diplomacy plans in keeping our country safe, secure, and strong,” he said in a statement.
Zarif echoed that sentiment, tweeting, “Happy to see dialog and respect, not threats and impetuousness, swiftly resolved the sailors episode. Let’s learn from this latest example.”
Even though the American sailors and their boats were released unharmed after less than 24 hours in Iranian custody, steadfast Iran hawks remained convinced that the incident proved stable U.S.-Iran relations were possible.
Cotton, who on Tuesday said the U.S. should exit the nuclear deal if the sailors weren’t returned immediately, challenged U.S. officials' assertions that the 10 Navy sailors ended up in disputed territory as a result of mechanical malfunctions. During an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Wednesday, the senator said he found it hard to believe that the IRGC wasn’t involved in “plotting this in advance, all designed to humiliate the president, therefore the United States, just days before we’re about to release billions and billions of dollars in sanctions relief to Iran.”
Bloomberg View columnists Josh Rogin and Eli Lake wrote that even if Iran were to release the sailors quickly, “the incident is a significant escalation in the Persian Gulf. It shows that despite a nuclear agreement with the West, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps is willing to board U.S. vessels, take American soldiers into custody, and, according to CNN citing U.S. officials, confiscate the crew's communications and GPS equipment.”
The problem with this logic is that the IRGC was also willing to detain U.S. soldiers before the nuclear deal -- and this incident, unlike previous ones, was resolved rapidly and peacefully.
Compare these events to 2004, when six British Marines and two naval personnel who were part of a U.S.-led force in Iraq were seized by Iranian officials for allegedly crossing into Iranian waters. The British military personnel were freed three days later, but the Iranians confiscated their equipment, and put one of their rigid inflatable boats on display in a Tehran museum. Former Marine Scott Fallon, one of the detainees,recalled being handcuffed, blindfolded and subjected to a mock execution. The detainees were forced to apologize on Iranian television before they were released.
In 2007, Iranian forces seized 15 British military personnel in disputed waters between Iraq and Iran. The captives were treated considerably better than the 2004 group, but it still took 13 days to resolve the dispute.
NO BOOTS
Idiot, I've never said Iran is anything but our enemy, since I've hailed this POTUS's willingness to speak to our enemies years ago. Unfortunately, there's little hope for you with your descent into the sick cult. You've lost any modicum of common sense you might have once had, in your quest for Putin Cock. A sicko like you would rather this brave sailor and his mates be dead, than the outcome that was achieved through diplomacy.hno:
They could have resisted. Period. The boats had the fire power.
USS Harry S. Truman battle group was close.
Like at Benghazi, assets not used.
Resisted??? And Got killed for erroneously drifting into Iranian Waters. Do you understand that they were in the wrong, Idiot? Tell me the Fire power of the Iranian force that captured them? Are you insane? You want them dead. OMG, you really have gone down the Sick Cult Rat Hole. Benghazi?
hno:hno:
Resisted??? And Got killed for erroneously drifting into Iranian Waters. Do you understand that they were in the wrong, Idiot? Tell me the Fire power of the Iranian force that captured them? Are you insane? You want them dead. OMG, you really have gone down the Sick Cult Rat Hole. Benghazi?
The Iranians were wrong.
They could have simply instructed them that they were Iranian waters and leave.
They could have assisted if indeed one of the vessels had mechanical problems.
There is a right to defend your selves and the assets you are in, the assets contained important computer, navigational, technological equipment. It is important not to let assets get into enemy hands.
The boats were well armed, machine guns mounted and rocket launchers. They were a match for the small Iranian boats. Also the aircraft battle group was close by.
It was simple capitulation, that is the hallmark of Obama.
Such cowardice empowers our enemies.
If they had fought back and resisted arrest, they would have been heroes and America would have held its head high.
The pictures are a disgrace and will be featured in history books forever.
Such a shame.
One for the history books with the American flag in the background.
Into the history books alongside.
"Tell the men to fire faster. Fight 'til she sinks, boys. Don't give up the ship." — Captain James Lawrence, USN, June 1813
"I have not yet begun to fight." — John Paul Jones September 23, 1779. During his engagement with the HMS Serapis
"Damn the torpedoes, Full speed ahead!" — Admiral David Glasgow Farragut
"I have not yet begun to fight." — John Paul Jones September 23, 1779. During his engagement with the HMS Serapis
"Damn the torpedoes, Full speed ahead!" — Admiral David Glasgow Farragut
Those in the 2 boats were brave US sailors. No they were jerks. Fortunately they are not representative of the US Navy.
They gave up pride and military assets, the commander apologised on Iranian TV without any sign of duress.
They are not representative. There are rotten apples even within the armed forces , Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl and Nidal Hasan, a U.S. Army major , as examples.
