http://www.examiner.com/international-headlines-in-national/us-prisoner-freed-from-iran-iranian-president-balks-idea-of-releasing-friends

I'm sure you've all heard of this by now, what are your thoughts? I don't understand why we're negotiating with what is, for all purposes, an enemy state, instead of sending in spec-ops to rescue the prisoners, kill any guards in the process, and send a clear message to this nutjob about happens when you fsck with a superpower.

err, out of curiosity, why do you mainly post politically oriented topics?

just curious

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis
Meh.

My short take on 'why not?': because that's as good an excuse as any for the Iranian government to claim something involving acts of war-- the sort of thing the UN and the rest of NATO would frown (understatement) on.

I thought falsely arresting and imprisoning the citizens of a sovereign nation was an act of war? For fsck's sake, these are the people who want to wipe Israel off the face of the map, and we're fscking negotiating with them for OUR citizens?!?

Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

ahahahahahahahahhahahaha

No really. Guantanamo Bay.



But on the exact topic: Iran says they crossed into Iranian territory. They were pretty close to the border if they didn't, but there is no way to prove anything either way. The thing is, their legal system doesn't work the same way ours does. They don't need empirical proof to imprison someone. It's akin to going to Germany and flying Swastikas proclaiming to be a Nazi, getting arrested, and then saying you shouldn't be arrested because you're allowed to do it in America. I'm not saying Iran is right, because they aren't, but according to the law of the land of the "crime," Iran is within their bounds.

OH YES WHAT A GREAT IDEA. YOU ARE SO AWESOME AND SMART. I BET YOU GO TO A REALLY GOOD SCHOOL.

Except that if it can't be proven they ever crossed into Iran, they shouldn't be subject to Iranian law. That would be like grabbing someone in Mexico and imprisoning them here for something that occurred in Mexico. And yes, I believe Guantanamo Bay is wrong for these same reasons. I still don't get how that atrocity is still operating, but that's something to be discussed in another topic.

While I may have come off a bit strong earlier, I still don't understand why a spec-ops option hasn't been considered. They're OUR citizens, NOT THEIRS. They have NO RIGHT to capture and imprison them. We might as well negotiate with terrorists. Oh wait.

Yeah, but wrong as they are, I think it's prudent to weigh the dangers of sparking an international incident, especially considering it's possible that Iran has viable nuclear weapons at this point.

That's true, but the fact that they're already actively trying to destroy another country sounds like it should be a much greater "international incident" to me than a quiet spec-ops raid to retrieve our own goddamn people.

They are illegally detained under our law. Legally, everything is fine and dandy over there.

Except they never broke the law over there. That's the whole point. They were hiking in a bordering nation when they were taken. That's called kidnapping last time I checked.

HELLO. I AM DSHIZNIT. I DON'T BELIEVE IN SOVEREIGN NOR DOMESTIC RIGHTS. 'MERICA IS THE BEST COUNTRY ON EARTH. ALL OF OUR CITIZENS ARE GODS, AND OTHER NATIONS SHOULD BE CRAPPING THEIR PANTS WITH JOY THAT THEY EVEN ARE VISITING.

Uh, no, from what I understand, the country they were hiking in had their own laws they were abiding by, and some Iranians took them by force into Iran to imprison them. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's called kidnapping, and it's recognized internationally as a crime. I'm not saying our citizens should be immune to the laws of other countries, just that we shouldn't tolerate them getting fscking imprisoned in another country when they're obeying the laws of the country they're in.

They were hiking very near the border and it is easily possible that they went across the border. We can't prove they didn't go across the border and one isn't innocent until proven guilty in Iran.

But if it can't be proven they ever entered Iran, it can't be proven they were ever subject to their laws. All that can be proven is that they were in Iraq, and subject to Iraqi law, which they were obeying. Kidnapping someone and then saying they broke your laws by entering you country is fscking batsh!t insane.

Or, put more simply, their legal system follows guilty-until-proven-innocent.

They had no business making these people a part of their legal system if they weren't in their country. Our people aren't gods, but they should damn well be able to follow the laws of one country without being persecuted by another.

Hello... I am allynfolksjr and i'm a piece of $hit.

What a loser!