Ponderable

Lion Eyes said:
Pffffttt........
There isn't even a partial ban on alcohol.
Tougher DUI laws was the answer.
Outlawing beer, wine and hard liquor was not the answer.
It's a foreign concept to some, but how 'bout holding those who break the law responsible?
You don't roust innocent patrons in a café or bar because some guy gets drunk and start swinging or leaves the bar drunk and hits a parked car.
You arrest the perpetrator.
When exactly did we find a "solution" to drunk driving?
Click to expand...

You can't make laws against shooting people tougher Lion, with guns, the goal should be a reduction in the population over time. Less guns, less gun deaths, accidents, etc.
 
Wez said:
You can't make laws against shooting people tougher Lion, with guns, the goal should be a reduction in the population over time. Less guns, less gun deaths, accidents, etc.
Click to expand...
Sure you can.
Use a gun and go to prison for life.
Less bad guys on the street, less crime, less gun play.
Violent crimes were much higher in the 80's & 90's
They started locking up the most violent & amazingly violent crime dropped.
Probably no correlation between the two, but interesting none the less.

Of course if you have a lawyer like HRC you would probably skate and due time served.
 
Hmmmm........

AP August 24, 2016
U.S. paid $1.3 billion to Iran two days after cash delivery

The Obama administration said Wednesday it paid $1.3 billion in interest to Iran in January to resolve a decades-old dispute over an undelivered military sale, two days after allowing $400 million in cash to fly to Tehran.

State Department spokeswoman Elizabeth Trudeau says the U.S. couldn’t say more about the Jan. 19 payments because of diplomatic sensitivities. They involved 13 separate payments of $99,999,999.99 and final payment of about $10 million. There was no explanation for the Treasury Department keeping the individual transactions under $100 million.

Read more:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-paid-1-3-billion-to-iran-two-days-after-cash-delivery/


Insanity....

State Department officials can't release more information on payments made to Iran this year because they have to respect the privacy of foreign governments, a spokeswoman said Wednesday.
"We do make a practice of not commenting publicly on transactions, including settlement payments, due to the confidential nature of those payments and to respect the privacy of our international partners," State Department spokeswoman Elizabeth Trudeau told reporters.
Trudeau made the comment while deflecting questions about the payments, including attempts to learn why the Treasury Department transferred the money destined for Iran to the State Department in $99,999,999.99 increments........

More:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/s...acy-of-govt.s-on-iran-payment/article/2600125
 
Not everything the Gov. does is according to a conspiratorial plot. I can think of a dozen reasons they don't want to be more transparent with dealings with countries like Iran. There are elements in the populations of both countries that despise dealings with the "devil" and will criticize anything done....hence your post....
 
Wez said:
Not everything the Gov. does is according to a conspiratorial plot. I can think of a dozen reasons they don't want to be more transparent with dealings with countries like Iran. There are elements in the populations of both countries that despise dealings with the "devil" and will criticize anything done....hence your post....
Click to expand...

The $400 million came from money Iran paid in advance for US weapons, things like F-14s and spare parts back when the Shah was a friend of ours and had lots of money to burn. When Iran went Islamo-looney, US government forbade weapons shipments to them, so Iran asked for the money back. We have been sitting on it for 30-plus years or so.

A parable - I owe you $100, and have been slow paying it back. One day you grab my car keys and ask me to come even. If I pay you the $100 to get my car keys back, is it "ransom"?
 
Wez said:
Not everything the Gov. does is according to a conspiratorial plot. I can think of a dozen reasons they don't want to be more transparent with dealings with countries like Iran. There are elements in the populations of both countries that despise dealings with the "devil" and will criticize anything done....hence your post....
Click to expand...

Care to list those dozens reasons?
 
Lion Eyes said:
Care to list those dozens reasons?
Click to expand...

Well not being a seasoned foreign affairs expert, my reasons would be rather elementary compared to what I suspect is going on, and as espola says above, it may not be complicated, it could just be standard policy to stay tight lipped about dealings with foreign nations.

If we were trying to work with elements within Iran that are more friendly to us than others, that would be one such reason to stay quiet...
 
Wez said:
Well not being a seasoned foreign affairs expert, my reasons would be rather elementary compared to what I suspect is going on, and as espola says above, it may not be complicated, it could just be standard policy to stay tight lipped about dealings with foreign nations.

If we were trying to work with elements within Iran that are more friendly to us than others, that would be one such reason to stay quiet...
Click to expand...

It would have been politically easier for Obama to wait until after the elections, but then those Americans would have been sitting in Iran that much longer.
 
espola said:
The $400 million came from money Iran paid in advance for US weapons, things like F-14s and spare parts back when the Shah was a friend of ours and had lots of money to burn. When Iran went Islamo-looney, US government forbade weapons shipments to them, so Iran asked for the money back. We have been sitting on it for 30-plus years or so.

A parable - I owe you $100, and have been slow paying it back. One day you grab my car keys and ask me to come even. If I pay you the $100 to get my car keys back, is it "ransom"?
Click to expand...
Ransom? More like black mail....

Say in the 1970's you kidnap friends and associates of mine & you pay groups that attack other friends and associates
All while calling for the destruction of me, my friends and associates.
While this is going on we "freeze" some of you assets.

Mean while 40 years flies by & we agree to a treaty and give 1.4 billion dollars to you to show how serious we are about being friendly.
Somewhere during the talks about all we have in common, we forgot to talk about and demand the release of the four friends and associates that you had once again kidnapped. You mention the frozen assets, the ones that your uncivilized actions had caused 40 years before.
We believing you had negotiated in good faith say sure to the money, but say what about our friends and associates coming home?
The next thing we know, you receive 400 million in unmarked currency and the four are freed...
Is it ransom?
 
Wez said:
Well not being a seasoned foreign affairs expert, my reasons would be rather elementary compared to what I suspect is going on, and as espola says above, it may not be complicated, it could just be standard policy to stay tight lipped about dealings with foreign nations.

If we were trying to work with elements within Iran that are more friendly to us than others, that would be one such reason to stay quiet...
Click to expand...
Alright fine. Just list 8 legitimate reasons...
 
espola said:
It would have been politically easier for Obama to wait until after the elections, but then those Americans would have been sitting in Iran that much longer.
Click to expand...
If Obama was the great leader he claims to be he would have negotiated their release when he signed the great deal we made with Iran to keep it nuclear free......pfffft.
 
Wez said:
If we were trying to work with elements within Iran that are more friendly to us than others, that would be one such reason to stay quiet...
Click to expand...
We are dealing with a government that continues to call for "Death to America", that is the biggest supporter of terrorism in the world, who stopped one of our navel vessels & then humiliated the crew by filming and using for propaganda images of those sailors on their knees with hands above their heads & who continue to show provocative actions by harassing our Navy in international waters. Iran has test fired missiles, they by treaty can't have & yet we clandescently give them money and State Department spokeswoman Elizabeth Trudeau says the U.S. couldn’t say more about the Jan. 19 payments because of diplomatic sensitivities.???
Screw America's sensitivities.
 
Lion Eyes said:
We are dealing with a government that continues to call for "Death to America", that is the biggest supporter of terrorism in the world, who stopped one of our navel vessels & then humiliated the crew by filming and using for propaganda images of those sailors on their knees with hands above their heads & who continue to show provocative actions by harassing our Navy in international waters. Iran has test fired missiles, they by treaty can't have & yet we clandescently give them money and State Department spokeswoman Elizabeth Trudeau says the U.S. couldn’t say more about the Jan. 19 payments because of diplomatic sensitivities.???
Screw America's sensitivities.
Click to expand...

I too am sickened by the extremist Religious wackos that run the show in Iran, but I feel that way about any and all people who take their religion too seriously. Death to America goes back to the fact that we intervened in their Country's political system to install someone friendly to us, we would be shouting the same thing if it were us. You can choose to believe there are nefarious reasons behind this payment, that's your choice, don't make it so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top