DescentBB

...yet poignant.

[youtube]GGnei1uCvr8[/youtube]

I'm glad they finally kicked ISIS out of there. Vandalizing bastards.

tunnelcat wrote:I'm glad they finally kicked ISIS out of there. Vandalizing bastards.

More like monsters.

TB, keep championing Hillary and ISIS will be back if she is elected.

I say, give Trump an M134 Minigun with enough ammo to supply a whole army, mount it to the top of his Trump mobile, and then airdrop the whole shebang inside of Syria. He can give 'em hell.

woodchip wrote:TB, keep championing Hillary and ISIS will be back if she is elected.

Yes because clearly they will magically give up and go home provided we elect an orangutan.

Top Gun wrote:

woodchip wrote:TB, keep championing Hillary and ISIS will be back if she is elected.

Yes because clearly they will magically give up and go home provided we elect an orangutan.

and they were saying the same thing about Reagan and the Iran hostages.

Some say the Reagan/Bush team bought off the Iranians to delay the hostage release. The precursor to Iran/Contra.

You'll have to do better than that Vander.

“Some say" that the Clinton’s had somebody killed…just saying.

woodchip wrote:You'll have to do better than that Vander.

I really don't, if you're going to suggest with a straight face that ISIS will give up if Trump is elected.

Spidey wrote:“Some say" that the Clinton’s had somebody killed…just saying.

Sure. It's absolutely a conspiracy theory, but it probably has more merit than the theory that Iran released the hostages because they were scared of Reagan.

Vander wrote:Sure. It's absolutely a conspiracy theory, but it probably has more merit than the theory that Iran released the hostages because they were scared of Reagan.

It wasn't because they were scared of Reagan. If the conspiracy is to be believed, Reagan made a deal with the Iranians to hold onto them until the election was over so that the Democrats would not get an October Surprise win if Iran released the hostages before the election.

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/04/15/world ... lease.html

But then, all the evidence was gone through with a bi-partisan House panel and they found no credible evidence that Reagan or his aides made any such deal.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1993 ... n-hostages

But the timing of the hostage release, the same day Reagan takes office, is highly suspicious. It stinks to high heaven. Thus the persistence of the conspiracy theory.

Which is probably exactly what the Iranians wanted…I mean if a deal was made, it was executed rather sloppily.

The deal could have been to let them go after the election but before Reagan was sworn in...makes more sense...no?

I think the Iranians would of much rather had Carter re-elected than having Reagan in.

Vander wrote:Some say the Reagan/Bush team bought off the Iranians to delay the hostage release. The precursor to Iran/Contra.

and they did nothing when a couple hundred Marines in Lebanon got blown up, either, by Iranian proxies. Red lines and all, however, make Obama far worse......

tunnelcat wrote:But then, all the evidence was gone through with a bi-partisan House panel and they found no credible evidence that Reagan or his aides made any such deal.

I don't really agree with this. They went through the evidence the White House provided. However, information was subsequently unearthed that possibly shows the White House did not provide all the evidence. (Why would they? Honesty? Integrity?) But I don't really care to litigate the theory here. Definitive proof is likely lost to history, so rather than say it happened or didn't, I simply consider it a possibility.

Spidey wrote:The deal could have been to let them go after the election but before Reagan was sworn in...makes more sense...no?

"After the election" is adequate for the purpose of the theory, in my view. That they were released just after Reagan's inauguration doesn't necessarily have much meaning since it can be viewed multiple ways.

Or the Iranians actually believed Cowboy Reagan would indeed carry through on his word. What you seem to forget Vander, capturing a countries embassy is considered a act of war. Carter was too much of a weak wool gatherer to take action. The Iranians knew this and they also knew Reagan was made of entirely different stuff. Hence the release of the captives.

the bluster of Trump and his supporters, explained scientifically:
http://nextshark.com/howler-monkey-testicles-study/

So does that mean Hillary has a small vagina?

woodchip wrote:Or the Iranians actually believed Cowboy Reagan would indeed carry through on his word. What you seem to forget Vander, capturing a countries embassy is considered a act of war. Carter was too much of a weak wool gatherer to take action. The Iranians knew this and they also knew Reagan was made of entirely different stuff. Hence the release of the captives.

Does this have any grounding in history? Or is this projection of your opinion of Reagan onto Iranians. One might counter that if Iran preferred Carter, they could've released the hostages before the election.

Vander wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:But then, all the evidence was gone through with a bi-partisan House panel and they found no credible evidence that Reagan or his aides made any such deal.

I don't really agree with this. They went through the evidence the White House provided. However, information was subsequently unearthed that possibly shows the White House did not provide all the evidence. (Why would they? Honesty? Integrity?) But I don't really care to litigate the theory here. Definitive proof is likely lost to history, so rather than say it happened or didn't, I simply consider it a possibility.

I'm afraid I agree with you on this one. Even though any "evidence" was conveniently non-existent, the stink of a dirty deal still pervaded the whole thing.

Hmmm...

New York Times wrote:What happened next Mr. Barnes has largely kept secret for nearly 43 years. Mr. Connally, he said, took him to one Middle Eastern capital after another that summer, meeting with a host of regional leaders to deliver a blunt message to be passed to Iran: Don’t release the hostages before the election. Mr. Reagan will win and give you a better deal.

Then shortly after returning home, Mr. Barnes said, Mr. Connally reported to William J. Casey, the chairman of Mr. Reagan’s campaign and later director of the Central Intelligence Agency, briefing him about the trip in an airport lounge.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/18/us/p ... tages.html

Well, well, well. If it looks like a duck, smells like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a damn duck no matter how much you claim it's a dog. The Dems always had their suspicions that the post election Iran hostage rescue was somehow manipulated by conservatives to sink Carter's re-election bid, but no one could ever prove it. Now there's proof that our hostages were used as pawns and were forced to wait for a miserable bit longer to be released, all so Americans would be stupid enough to elect Reagan as a hero. What a bunch of crap. I guess it proves one thing. Conservatives can't win elections unless they cheat.

And Vander, you've got a better memory than me to dig up this necro thread.

I believe Hillary Clinton is in heaven with Jesus and a demon replaced her by inhabiting a clone.

Burlyman wrote: ↑Fri Apr 14, 2023 2:32 am I believe Hillary Clinton is in heaven with Jesus and a demon replaced her by inhabiting a clone.

The scary part is that I can't tell if you're serious or not.

He's a Flat Earther. Nothing he says is serious.

Tunnelcat wrote: ↑Fri Apr 14, 2023 5:01 pm Nothing he says is serious.

Isn't that the truth. With all the asinine comments he makes, it's very true that nothing he says is serious or taken seriously. He doesn't talk to spirits (maybe himself), and he knows the Earth is round. But we need to have some fun with our friendly buddy Samus Neo.  

I never read anything you say, paper tiger.

Burlyman wrote: ↑Thu Apr 20, 2023 5:12 pm I never read anything you say, I'm a big stinky doo doo head.

lol nice quote. You two literally aren't even alive anymore.

woodchip wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2016 6:53 am TB, keep championing Hillary and ISIS will be back if she is elected.

Hillary can't be elected because she is in heaven and replaced by a demon (clone).

Ain't cha just the cutest lil man child.

Yeah there was a storm named after me, el Niño

Anyone so focused on Hillary that they need to come up with this kind of crazy crap needs to be smacked upside the head and forced to climb out of their delusional fantasy shell, face reality and get a life. She's just an old lady now, a lady who turned a blind eye to her filandering oversexed husband because it was political calculation for future power, a move that spectacularly blew up in her face because of her own arrogance.

Nevermind about Hillary Clinton then...

I'm glad ThunderBunny is back.