(2007-03-27) — Iran announced today that it would release immediately the 15 British soldiers and marines it took hostage last week to avoid further “cordial pressure and devastating pleasantries” from British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
“In this test of wills,” said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, “we acknowledge the superior power of the adversary. We cannot withstand another onslaught of polite diplomatic language nor the withering, if unspoken, consternation we detect in the eyes of Tony Blair.”
A spokesman for Mr. Blair said, “Tyrants like Ahmadinejad, and the radical Mullahs who prop him up, understand only one thing: swift, targeted courtesy. And though we were reluctant to overreact to this little dust up, the Iranian leader now knows we mean business.”
The British Prime Minister’s spokesman added, “Our patience is virtually unlimited, but not infinitely unlimited. That’s why Iran blinked. They could see a day coming when the talking would stop, and we would reach into our arsenal of UN resolutions to consider more sanctions.”
44 responses so far ↓
1 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 8:08 am
On behalf of Democrats everywhere I am proud to be first again.
ET
2 Scott Ott // Mar 27, 2007 at 8:15 am
Iran Blinks Under ‘Cordial Pressure’ from Tony Blair…
by Scott Ott(2007-03-27) — Iran announced today that it would release immediately the 15 British soldiers and marines it took hostage last week to avoid further “cordial pressure and devastating pleasantries†from British Prime Minister Tony……
3 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 8:19 am
Let’s see if it takes more than 444 days to get the hostages back like it did DEMOCRAT Jimmah Carter … you know that progressive DEMOCRAT President that had one of the healthiest economies ever with double-digit interest rates, double-digit mortgage, double-digit inflation and seven percent unemployment. Big numbers are always good when talking about the economic health of America, right?
4 onlineanalyst // Mar 27, 2007 at 8:22 am
Who knew that the Persians would succumb to the temptation of chocolate-covered cherries? Strong diplomacy then means we just need to add a few sweeteners?
Has anyone noticed that, for a Dhimmi, rinkydink surely spends a lot of time in the Fox hole?
5 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 8:42 am
Henry,
Very impressive post your number 3. That was a long time ago. How far back can we go? Is Hoover too far?
Also, is it unfair to speak of Nixon? He was never impeached because caught a flight out of town. But, he is the only president to ever resign, or should I say “Cut and Run”.
Just Axting,
ET
6 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 8:47 am
?
7 Shelly // Mar 27, 2007 at 9:04 am
It’s always nice to see consistency in life. Once again ET serves as an apologetic for people who kidnap and torture repeatedly, have been sanctioned yet again by the UN - something that is incredibly difficult to achieve with these appeasers of evil, and openly expresses the most vile form of anti-Semitism. Any other hate-mongers you’d like to support? I’m sure your hatred of your own country can’t just be limited to supporting Iran. After all, there are other countries that support murdering women publicly.
8 Just Ranting // Mar 27, 2007 at 9:07 am
Let’s see…Tony Blair announced he will begin withdrawing nearly half of the British troops in Iraq by the end of the year. It appears the Iran is not eager to see them go. Tony Blair may want to consider sending more British military to Iran, perhaps by the thousands. Tehran can be loverly this time of year when the Al-Qaeda return, and the suicide bomber are in boom.
9 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 9:16 am
Shelly:
You might have a bright future with The RNC, The Washington Times, FOX News, The Church of Scientology, or Stephen King (as a Character, of course).
ET
10 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 9:16 am
The topic was about hostages being held in Iran. I wasn’t aware Iran held either American or British hostages under the administrations of Hoover or Nixon.
So once again I find myself bowing to your superior intellect and “logic”. Don’t keep that mothership waiting on my account.
11 Deerslayer // Mar 27, 2007 at 9:19 am
Re: ET #6
Are you looking for a clue…
12 Shelly // Mar 27, 2007 at 9:25 am
ET, I take it as a compliment that you needed to move to personally insulting me so quickly. Wouldn’t it be fun, just once, if you could actually debate a point and have even a tiny semblance of ration, logic or thought to support it? Have you ever asked yourself why you only embrace hate?
13 Ms RightWing, Ink // Mar 27, 2007 at 9:36 am
I see someone slipped a joker into the deck of cards. They don’t use jokers in poker do they?
14 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 9:50 am
Shelly, as an intellectual progressive it’s his nature to insult people when he can’t logically advance his argument. That was what he was born to do, insult and irritate people.
And just as he has choked down the rationalization that “unreasoned dissent founded upon palpable lies is the greatest form of patriotism” he’ll soon come around to the much simpler left-wing rationalization that “Treason is an even a higher form of patriotism.” - General Benedict Arnold. Sure there was money or accolades to be made betraying America, but it can also be reasonably argued being a man of such complexity Arnold probably believed he was a patriot to a higher cause, that as a “loyalist”. Remember, in the final analyst, liberal Democrats are first patriots to their political causes which they falsely believe to be most reflective of historical Americanism. The more radical liberal is a patriot to their global citizenship which they see as superior to their own American citizenship. At least the latter is being intellectually honest with themselves.
Only in liberal land does supporting your government’s fight against an evil enemy abroad make a person a dupe while hating your President, seeing your country as the greatest evil in the world, mocking the mission of American troops engaged in a life-and-death struggle with an implacable foe, constantly demonizing your country’s history and religious traditions, and calling a just and noble cause illegal and immoral makes one some kind of uber-patriot! Only a warped mind can embrace such Gorewellian conundrums.
15 RedPepper // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:02 am
I knew Maggie Thatcher. Maggie Thatcher was a hero of mine, and Minister Blair, you’re no Maggie Thatcher !
/channeling Lloyd Bentsen …
16 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:06 am
Shelly:
Are you nuts? Read number 7 again! Did you refer to me by name, then associate me with horrible things, and people.
“Once again ET serves as an apologetic for people who kidnap and torture repeatedly, have been sanctioned yet again by the UN - something that is incredibly difficult to achieve with these appeasers of evil, and openly expresses the most vile form of anti-Semitism.”
I never said anything that would either cause or justify those hateful remarks, and I take them very personally! I have been here long enough to see the twisted and vulgar logic which so often dominate your posts.
So keep if you can’t keep you paint away from me; try to find enough character not to complain if I at least bring my own brush.
ET
17 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:11 am
Speaking of paint, I wonder is ET suffers from lead poisoning? I can’t wait until he rants about me “calling him a traitor.” I’m willing to bet that he can’t see the forest because of the trees but I fear I might have to bow to his superior “logic” even after I show him the error of his way? I’m betting he can’t see through his blind hatred. Being forewarned is being forearmed … at least for normal people.
18 RedPepper // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:12 am
The latest bad news :
Tests Show Snow’s Cancer Has Returned .
19 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:13 am
That’s it serpent! Whisper in her ear.
20 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:13 am
… hmmmm, the ether has ate my post.
21 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:16 am
It will be interesting to see how the moonbats react to the news of Tony Snow’s cancer returning. I can almost predict their response. Well, off to the DUmmies and KOS Kidz to monitor their progress.
22 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:17 am
… hmmm, the ether ate my post again.
23 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:29 am
Henry,
“Shelly, as an intellectual progressive it’s his nature to insult people when he can’t logically advance his argument. That was what he was born to do, insult and irritate people.”
Like this?
ET
24 boberinyetagain // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:32 am
moonbats love cancer hank, everyone knows that! We don’t even care who gets it, just so someone does. brightens the day dontcha know?
back on topic…
“not the comfy chair!”
or…
“brandish that banana”
All kidding aside it does seem from today’s news that Iran did indeed “blink” and are thinking that perhaps they might find a way to release those soldiers
and nary a bomb was dropped, no one died over it.
I know it ruins some of you war mongers day to see a peaceful solution when there was the shining opportunity for more bloodshed but, sometimes things just don’t fall into place
dang it all!
drat the luck!
25 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:33 am
It should be easy to replace Tony Snow, there are so many liars among you.
ET
26 Just Ranting // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:43 am
ET,
You seem nastier than usual this morning. Is that broom you ride starting to chafe?
27 meesterbig // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:44 am
Does this mean Tony Snow now gets to appear with The Perky One?
ET is an IDI OTT.
28 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:50 am
Henry,
I’ll stop, comment, and mourn Tony Snow’s illness.
But it may be awhile till I can get to him. He’ll have go after those young American’s who are serving, those who have been wounded, and those who have been killed in Iraq.
I didn’t give Tony Snow cancer, but you did aid the Bush administration to give us, and continue to give us these awful and needless losses Iraq.
Bush planned a war in Iraq before 9/11/01.
Tell me Henry, who’s the traitor?
ET
29 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 11:01 am
You think I called you a traitor at #14? You’re strongly implying I’m a traitor for voting for George Bush. Curious definition of being a traitor. Ready yet to admit that you also think Bush is Hitler ya progressive moonbat?
Needless losses? Are you implying that the lives of American soldiers were wasted on an ignoble, immoral or illegal cause? You have much to answer for when it comes to the blood of patriots spilt to give you the right to make a complete horse’s arse of yourself you lying little troll.
But in the end I will always be defeated by your superior “logic”.
30 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 11:16 am
Actually a bi-partisan Congress planned a war in Iraq under Public Law 105-235 in 1998. The gutless Bill Clinton didn’t act upon it preferring instead to let the problem fester until its someone else’s problem.
And here’s another example of liberal cowardice with respect to Saddam’s Iraq here, again in 1998. Yep, kick the can down the road, let Iraq grow even more cancerous and then blame the next President for taking action when Middle-East lunatics, who counted Iraq as one of their safe havens, start attacking American interests. Not even the 1993 WTC bombing, the U.S.S. Cole, and a number of other American interests attacked by Muslim nutbags is enough to get self-righteous, smug liberals like you to act. You just want to sit on you fat backsides and criticize those who do have the temerity to defend America and what’s left of the free world from foreign threats. It’s far easier to criticize than it is to actually address a problem. You fit that description to a “T”.
But then I’ll probably have to humble myself before your superior “logic” … known on our side of the aisle as mindless drivel.
31 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 11:28 am
Sorry Scott, I’ll be tipping the jar again … soon. I just didn’t believe neverthink would bother to follow the link having admitted in the past he often doesn’t.
From TIME magazine:
HOW THE ATTACK IS PLANNED
The bombs will hit Saddam hard, but they probably won’t kill him or end his drive for bioweapons
By Bruce W. Nelan
(TIME, February 23) — Inside Operation Desert Storm, the military juggernaut that freed Kuwait in 1991, was a small, secret operation all its own: an effort to kill Saddam Hussein. Of the 40,000 U.S. air attacks during the Gulf War, about 40 were aimed at the Iraqi leader’s headquarters, residences, command bunkers and buildings he was expected to visit. Pentagon lawyers had ruled that Saddam was a legal target because he was considered a wartime military commander. But in the end it didn’t matter. Saddam and his entire family came through without a scratch. …
[Editor's Note: Remainder of story deleted. Please use excerpts and links to family-friendly sites, or simply email this article to the one person you wish would read it.]
32 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 12:09 pm
The point of the TIME’s news article is Bush didn’t have to “plan a war”. Bush inherited a framework for an Iraq War from the Clinton Administration my revisionistic little troll. The Bush Administration has made that point several times going back to 2002 but I guess you were too mired in your blind hate to notice.
33 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 12:12 pm
Look here Henry,
I have told you often George W. Bush is too stupid to be compared to Adolf Hitler.
I do believe there are similarities in their purposes, but even so, Hilter invaded other countries so much better than Bush.
You ask: “Are you implying that the lives of American soldiers were wasted on an ignoble, immoral or illegal cause?”
I never meant to imply it! Yes, Yes, Yes!!!! Ignoble, immoral and illegal CAUSE. I refer ONLY to the war in Iraq, not Afghanistan!
Who are you to tell me about the blood of patriots, you Chickenhawk!
It is true, I served here in the United States. Even so Squiggie, it’s not like you and I have anything in common.
I didn’t say I never fired a weapon at a human target, or that I was never fired upon, in direct connection to my military duties, right here in the United States.
ET
34 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 1:03 pm
I see rational discourse involving logical sequiturs do not apply when trying to get you to see how you are diminishing the blood of the American soldiers whom you say are dying for a Quixotic cause. And this before the outcome of a war is even determined! What hubris! I’ll never understand a people so invested in American defeat based on mere personal opinion and hate.
So once again your “logic” has defeated me.
35 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 1:05 pm
… pushin’ through.
36 Darthmeister // Mar 27, 2007 at 2:13 pm
neverthink,
I’m emailing some of your latest comments to five chickenhawk friends of mine who have or are presently serving in Iraq. I’ll let you know their responses if they get back to me by this evening or the morning. Should prove interesting.
37 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 2:24 pm
Henry:
You will never justify the loss of those Americans who have given their lives, and greatly suffered in a war that should never have been fought, by sending more of them into the breech.
Quixotic cause?
Don Quixote didn’t take La Mancha with him.
Windmills don’t joust back!
Dumbyah lacks all of Quixote’s nobility, even though he has about the same sense of reality.
Henry, your loyalty to Dumbyah, even though misguided, would be reminiscent of Sancho Panza, IF YOU WERE IN IRAQ!
ET
38 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 3:33 pm
Just Ranting,
You do have a point, sorry.
ET
39 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 3:42 pm
My post 25 was completely out of line.
I’m sorry, disagreement is not a lie. It was not a mistake, Just Ranting got it right.
ET
40 camojack // Mar 27, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Tehran can be loverly this time of year when the Al-Qaeda return, and the suicide bomber are in boom.
Comment by Just Ranting — March 27, 2007 @ 9:07 am
In boom…that would be pretty funny, if it wasn’t so [deadly] accurate.
41 Beerme // Mar 27, 2007 at 6:25 pm
ET, Phone Home!
Hugh are soooo funny!
Did you ever hear a shot fired in anger?
42 everthink // Mar 27, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Beerme,
Not all of us have always parked our backsides in a booth, or tower, eating candy bars, and dreaming of beer.
Have you ever had to deal with one of yours outside a controlled environment?
Keep laughing,
ET
43 Beerme // Mar 28, 2007 at 5:26 pm
One doesn’t do a quarter of a century in that environment (which is far from controlled) without doing so. But I’ll bet I dealt with more trouble (one-on-one) in my Detroit neighborhood growing up, than your SOAR-@$$ dealt with in the military. Or as an Aggie.
So, I guess the answer is you never did hear a shot fired in anger, eh?
44 Britain’s Impotence over Hostage Sailors - Ayn Rand Meta-Blog // Mar 28, 2007 at 7:08 pm
[...] is Tony Blair’s withering consternation. Posted by Joshua Zader · Link [...]
You must log in to post a comment.