Jimmy Carter Rushed To Hospital For Emergency Surgery To Relieve Pressure From A Brain Bleed

[rightwinger]

Jimmy who?

That hostage thing went on to long. Shoulda said release them or we're gonna put a boot up your ass

Exactly what made Carter great

Using military force to free hostages would likely lead to hostage deaths. Carter was willing to appear to be weak in order to safely negotiate the hostages release

The easiest course of action would have been to go all badass, kill Iranians and write off any hostage deaths as the price to be paid

If he had done so, he would have gotten a second term

Didn't Carter's attempted military mission fail? No hostages died however several military personal and an Iranian civilian died. That failed military force led to Vance resigning as Secretary of State.

Is there another version that you are going by?

Carter attempted a rescue mission which failed miserably

What I am talking about is the bombing/ invasion that hawks were advocating. Because he refused, Carter was looked at as weak

Which taken by itself speaks volumes about our values, and not in any good way.

Or as SIL put it, "put a boot in their ass" just before a series of grunting noises. Eloquent.

Politically, Carter should have played the “Don’t fuk with the US” card and bombed the shit out of them and invaded. The public would have loved him for it.

But Carter relied on patience and silent diplomacy to get the hostages safely released without bloodshed on both sides The public looked at that as weakness and Carters political career was over

 

[rightwinger]

Jimmy who?

That hostage thing went on to long. Shoulda said release them or we're gonna put a boot up your ass

Exactly what made Carter great

Using military force to free hostages would likely lead to hostage deaths. Carter was willing to appear to be weak in order to safely negotiate the hostages release

The easiest course of action would have been to go all badass, kill Iranians and write off any hostage deaths as the price to be paid

If he had done so, he would have gotten a second term

Didn't Carter's attempted military mission fail? No hostages died however several military personal and an Iranian civilian died. That failed military force led to Vance resigning as Secretary of State.

Is there another version that you are going by?

Carter attempted a rescue mission which failed miserably

What I am talking about is the bombing/ invasion that hawks were advocating. Because he refused, Carter was looked at as weak

He should have never let the Shah into the United States, we backed the wrong guy, again.

I think that was Carters humanitarian side. He looked at the Shah as a long time US ally who needed medical treatment

 

[Papageorgio]

That hostage thing went on to long. Shoulda said release them or we're gonna put a boot up your ass

Exactly what made Carter great

Using military force to free hostages would likely lead to hostage deaths. Carter was willing to appear to be weak in order to safely negotiate the hostages release

The easiest course of action would have been to go all badass, kill Iranians and write off any hostage deaths as the price to be paid

If he had done so, he would have gotten a second term

Didn't Carter's attempted military mission fail? No hostages died however several military personal and an Iranian civilian died. That failed military force led to Vance resigning as Secretary of State.

Is there another version that you are going by?

Carter attempted a rescue mission which failed miserably

What I am talking about is the bombing/ invasion that hawks were advocating. Because he refused, Carter was looked at as weak

He should have never let the Shah into the United States, we backed the wrong guy, again.

I think that was Carters humanitarian side. He looked at the Shah as a long time US ally who needed medical treatment

He was a cruel and evil man, not sure why Carter thought he was any different.

 

[Pogo]

Jimmy who?

That hostage thing went on to long. Shoulda said release them or we're gonna put a boot up your ass

Exactly what made Carter great

Using military force to free hostages would likely lead to hostage deaths. Carter was willing to appear to be weak in order to safely negotiate the hostages release

The easiest course of action would have been to go all badass, kill Iranians and write off any hostage deaths as the price to be paid

If he had done so, he would have gotten a second term

Didn't Carter's attempted military mission fail? No hostages died however several military personal and an Iranian civilian died. That failed military force led to Vance resigning as Secretary of State.

Is there another version that you are going by?

Carter attempted a rescue mission which failed miserably

What I am talking about is the bombing/ invasion that hawks were advocating. Because he refused, Carter was looked at as weak

He should have never let the Shah into the United States, we backed the wrong guy, again.

That (again) goes back to 1953 and the Dulles brothers. That's where that seed was planted, all because of the "commie" witch craze and the Dulles' corporate evangelism. We overthrew that country's own elected head of state and installed our jerkoff puppet that the people hated. And the Iranian people did not forget who made that happen.

In short, as noted before -- No Dulles, no Vietnam; No Dulles, no Iran hostages. We might add, No Dulles, no impoverished Guatemalans at the border.

 

[rightwinger]

Exactly what made Carter great

Using military force to free hostages would likely lead to hostage deaths. Carter was willing to appear to be weak in order to safely negotiate the hostages release

The easiest course of action would have been to go all badass, kill Iranians and write off any hostage deaths as the price to be paid

If he had done so, he would have gotten a second term

Didn't Carter's attempted military mission fail? No hostages died however several military personal and an Iranian civilian died. That failed military force led to Vance resigning as Secretary of State.

Is there another version that you are going by?

Carter attempted a rescue mission which failed miserably

What I am talking about is the bombing/ invasion that hawks were advocating. Because he refused, Carter was looked at as weak

He should have never let the Shah into the United States, we backed the wrong guy, again.

I think that was Carters humanitarian side. He looked at the Shah as a long time US ally who needed medical treatment

He was a cruel and evil man, not sure why Carter thought he was any different.

The Shah of Iran was a cruel and evil dictator. But he was OUR cruel and evil dictator.

Carter sided with him over the Ayatollah, it led to the hostage crisis

 

[Polishprince]

Didn't Carter's attempted military mission fail? No hostages died however several military personal and an Iranian civilian died. That failed military force led to Vance resigning as Secretary of State.

Is there another version that you are going by?

Carter attempted a rescue mission which failed miserably

What I am talking about is the bombing/ invasion that hawks were advocating. Because he refused, Carter was looked at as weak

He should have never let the Shah into the United States, we backed the wrong guy, again.

I think that was Carters humanitarian side. He looked at the Shah as a long time US ally who needed medical treatment

He was a cruel and evil man, not sure why Carter thought he was any different.

The Shah of Iran was a cruel and evil dictator. But he was OUR cruel and evil dictator.

Carter sided with him over the Ayatollah, it led to the hostage crisis

I know that's what Pahlavi's reputation is among libs like Khomeini, but its an opinion not based upon actual fact.

In reality, the Shah had an enlightened reign when seated upon the Peacock Throne. He brought Iran into the 20th Century.

 

[MAGAman]

He authorized a rescue attempt not a bombing or military invasion like was being demanded in the Conservative press

Bomb, Bomb, Bomb
Bomb, Bomb Iran

Is what they demanded

Who?

Link?

 

[Pogo]

He authorized a rescue attempt not a bombing or military invasion like was being demanded in the Conservative press

Bomb, Bomb, Bomb
Bomb, Bomb Iran

Is what they demanded

Who?

Link?

K.

​

 

[Polishprince]

He authorized a rescue attempt not a bombing or military invasion like was being demanded in the Conservative press

Bomb, Bomb, Bomb
Bomb, Bomb Iran

Is what they demanded

Who?

Link?

K.

​

Actually, this is just a cover for the Sainted John McCain's hit "bomb, bomb,bomb, bomb, bomb Iran"

Not a Trump original at all, but straight from the liberal record graveyard.

 

[Pogo]

He authorized a rescue attempt not a bombing or military invasion like was being demanded in the Conservative press

Bomb, Bomb, Bomb
Bomb, Bomb Iran

Is what they demanded

Who?

Link?

K.

​

Actually, this is just a cover for the Sainted John McCain's hit "bomb, bomb,bomb, bomb, bomb Iran"

Not a Trump original at all, but straight from the liberal record graveyard.

Correct, John McCain is the lyricist. SMEGMAman seems oblivious to that. Perhaps he's like eight years old.

Nobody claimed it was a "Rump original" did they. Back in the 1970s Rump was still getting his ass sued for not renting to black people.

 

[22lcidw]

Didn't Carter's attempted military mission fail? No hostages died however several military personal and an Iranian civilian died. That failed military force led to Vance resigning as Secretary of State.

Is there another version that you are going by?

Carter attempted a rescue mission which failed miserably

What I am talking about is the bombing/ invasion that hawks were advocating. Because he refused, Carter was looked at as weak

He should have never let the Shah into the United States, we backed the wrong guy, again.

I think that was Carters humanitarian side. He looked at the Shah as a long time US ally who needed medical treatment

He was a cruel and evil man, not sure why Carter thought he was any different.

The Shah of Iran was a cruel and evil dictator. But he was OUR cruel and evil dictator.

Carter sided with him over the Ayatollah, it led to the hostage crisis

What do you do? If we back one type of person we are nasty. If we back another type we are nasty. People of any nation need to want freedoms whatever the costs. People in Cuba fought for communism. The result not so good. The Soviet Union the same. As other nations. We at times are a reluctant global policeman who have interfered with a lot of nations. Do we back dictators? Do we remove them? Carter was a good man elected in a wrong time with questionable policies during an economic malaise. Presidents can be elected in favorable times and seem to be remembered fondly. America at the time was looking for a man who relaxed them after the past decade of war and domestic unrest over that and social issues. Which led to Reagan who kept the calm and more and gave us economic growth with prosperity. At the same time of the Shah we seemed to let the Ayatollah who was not In Iran percolate into someone important. The helicopters we used were built for a war with Russia. They did not fly well with sand that corrupted the engines. Supposedly at that time according to the newspapers there were stories that Israel had better filters and refused to give them to us. Even today the V 22 Marine helicopter is not the perfect desert air device because its huge rotors kick up a lot of dust depending on the desert terrain.

 

[rightwinger]

Carter attempted a rescue mission which failed miserably

What I am talking about is the bombing/ invasion that hawks were advocating. Because he refused, Carter was looked at as weak

He should have never let the Shah into the United States, we backed the wrong guy, again.

I think that was Carters humanitarian side. He looked at the Shah as a long time US ally who needed medical treatment

He was a cruel and evil man, not sure why Carter thought he was any different.

The Shah of Iran was a cruel and evil dictator. But he was OUR cruel and evil dictator.

Carter sided with him over the Ayatollah, it led to the hostage crisis

What do you do? If we back one type of person we are nasty. If we back another type we are nasty. People of any nation need to want freedoms whatever the costs. People in Cuba fought for communism. The result not so good. The Soviet Union the same. As other nations. We at times are a reluctant global policeman who have interfered with a lot of nations. Do we back dictators? Do we remove them? Carter was a good man elected in a wrong time with questionable policies during an economic malaise. Presidents can be elected in favorable times and seem to be remembered fondly. America at the time was looking for a man who relaxed them after the past decade of war and domestic unrest over that and social issues. Which led to Reagan who kept the calm and more and gave us economic growth with prosperity. At the same time of the Shah we seemed to let the Ayatollah who was not In Iran percolate into someone important. The helicopters we used were built for a war with Russia. They did not fly well with sand that corrupted the engines. Supposedly at that time according to the newspapers there were stories that Israel had better filters and refused to give them to us. Even today the V 22 Marine helicopter is not the perfect desert air device because its huge rotors kick up a lot of dust depending on the desert terrain.

Carter was a good man put in a bad situation.
Iran was a no win situation. Decades of bad US policy has ruined our position in the region. The Shah was a US puppet who was hated in his own country. The Ayatollah was a religious nut leading his country back to the Stone Age
Once the hostages were taken, we were not in a good bargaining position. Hard to deal rationally with religious fanatics
Keep in mind we had just gotten out of Vietnam five years earlier. Engaging in another war was not that popular

 

[Pogo]

What do you do? If we back one type of person we are nasty. If we back another type we are nasty. People of any nation need to want freedoms whatever the costs. People in Cuba fought for communism. The result not so good.

Uh........ really. When was this?

 

[Carl in Michigan]

He should have never let the Shah into the United States, we backed the wrong guy, again.

I think that was Carters humanitarian side. He looked at the Shah as a long time US ally who needed medical treatment

He was a cruel and evil man, not sure why Carter thought he was any different.

The Shah of Iran was a cruel and evil dictator. But he was OUR cruel and evil dictator.

Carter sided with him over the Ayatollah, it led to the hostage crisis

What do you do? If we back one type of person we are nasty. If we back another type we are nasty. People of any nation need to want freedoms whatever the costs. People in Cuba fought for communism. The result not so good. The Soviet Union the same. As other nations. We at times are a reluctant global policeman who have interfered with a lot of nations. Do we back dictators? Do we remove them? Carter was a good man elected in a wrong time with questionable policies during an economic malaise. Presidents can be elected in favorable times and seem to be remembered fondly. America at the time was looking for a man who relaxed them after the past decade of war and domestic unrest over that and social issues. Which led to Reagan who kept the calm and more and gave us economic growth with prosperity. At the same time of the Shah we seemed to let the Ayatollah who was not In Iran percolate into someone important. The helicopters we used were built for a war with Russia. They did not fly well with sand that corrupted the engines. Supposedly at that time according to the newspapers there were stories that Israel had better filters and refused to give them to us. Even today the V 22 Marine helicopter is not the perfect desert air device because its huge rotors kick up a lot of dust depending on the desert terrain.

Carter was a good man put in a bad situation.
Iran was a no win situation. Decades of bad US policy has ruined our position in the region. The Shah was a US puppet who was hated in his own country. The Ayatollah was a religious nut leading his country back to the Stone Age
Once the hostages were taken, we were not in a good bargaining position. Hard to deal rationally with religious fanatics
Keep in mind we had just gotten out of Vietnam five years earlier. Engaging in another war was not that popular

He was a "well meaning" man. Regardless, I wish him well and hope for the best for his family.

 

[Papageorgio]

He should have never let the Shah into the United States, we backed the wrong guy, again.

I think that was Carters humanitarian side. He looked at the Shah as a long time US ally who needed medical treatment

He was a cruel and evil man, not sure why Carter thought he was any different.

The Shah of Iran was a cruel and evil dictator. But he was OUR cruel and evil dictator.

Carter sided with him over the Ayatollah, it led to the hostage crisis

What do you do? If we back one type of person we are nasty. If we back another type we are nasty. People of any nation need to want freedoms whatever the costs. People in Cuba fought for communism. The result not so good. The Soviet Union the same. As other nations. We at times are a reluctant global policeman who have interfered with a lot of nations. Do we back dictators? Do we remove them? Carter was a good man elected in a wrong time with questionable policies during an economic malaise. Presidents can be elected in favorable times and seem to be remembered fondly. America at the time was looking for a man who relaxed them after the past decade of war and domestic unrest over that and social issues. Which led to Reagan who kept the calm and more and gave us economic growth with prosperity. At the same time of the Shah we seemed to let the Ayatollah who was not In Iran percolate into someone important. The helicopters we used were built for a war with Russia. They did not fly well with sand that corrupted the engines. Supposedly at that time according to the newspapers there were stories that Israel had better filters and refused to give them to us. Even today the V 22 Marine helicopter is not the perfect desert air device because its huge rotors kick up a lot of dust depending on the desert terrain.

Carter was a good man put in a bad situation.
Iran was a no win situation. Decades of bad US policy has ruined our position in the region. The Shah was a US puppet who was hated in his own country. The Ayatollah was a religious nut leading his country back to the Stone Age
Once the hostages were taken, we were not in a good bargaining position. Hard to deal rationally with religious fanatics
Keep in mind we had just gotten out of Vietnam five years earlier. Engaging in another war was not that popular

Carter seemed in and over is head from the minute he stepped into office and until he left. Just didn't like his decision making process.

 

[Pogo]

Story: WSB-TV

 

[MAGAman]

He authorized a rescue attempt not a bombing or military invasion like was being demanded in the Conservative press

Bomb, Bomb, Bomb
Bomb, Bomb Iran

Is what they demanded

Who?

Link?

K.

​

You've got nothing. Got it.

 

[sparky]

Shame on you for taking a man's illness and using it for your own political rant

Partisans suck....

~S~

 

[Pogo]

On the other hand...

Tiny Rejuvenated Jimmy Carter Emerges From Pile Of Ashes After Aged Ex-President Bursts Into Flames

>> ATLANTA—Rising triumphantly from a sudden swirl of golden light that had consumed his former ailing body, a tiny, rejuvenated President Jimmy Carter emerged from a pile of ashes Tuesday after the aged ex-president’s past incarnation burst into flames. “Behold! I am born anew!” the 6-inch-tall former president proclaimed in a high-pitched voice, raising his minuscule, youthful hands in exultation from the glowing embers as he announced that his appearance heralded “a new dawn” in affordable housing, peacekeeping, and guinea worm eradication... << (link)​

 

[Pogo]

He authorized a rescue attempt not a bombing or military invasion like was being demanded in the Conservative press

Bomb, Bomb, Bomb
Bomb, Bomb Iran

Is what they demanded

Who?

Link?

K.

​

You've got nothing. Got it.

Not when you edit it out of the post, no.