Jimmy Carter Says He Would Have Defeated Reagan Had He Been More 'manly'

[M14 Shooter]

No. They were delaying the negotiations as a way to punish Carter. They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day.

Based on....?

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Antares]

Nobody but the most Left of the Left ever tries to make this case.

 

[aaronleland]

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

So you think it was merely coincidence? Hmm.

What happened? Reagan's inaugural speech frightened Iran into submission? Kinda like how Reagan's "tear down this wall" speech magically caused the Soviet Union to collapse?

No. They were delaying the negotiations as a way to punish Carter. They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day.

Yeah, even if Carter won.

That would teach him.

Nobody expected Carter to win if the hostages weren't released. As evidenced by Reagan's landslide victory.

 

[Ibentoken]

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

So you think it was merely coincidence? Hmm.

I bet he's a lefty, huh.

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

So you think it was merely coincidence? Hmm.

What happened? Reagan's inaugural speech frightened Iran into submission? Kinda like how Reagan's "tear down this wall" speech magically caused the Soviet Union to collapse?

No. They were delaying the negotiations as a way to punish Carter. They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day.

Do you have a source or is that your opinion?

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

Well, Carter learned a lesson in history that lefties ignore today at their own peril: you don't deal with fanatic Muslims from a position of weakness and appeasement. If this current democrat moron in the White House had ever picked up a history book in his entire life, he might understand that.

 

[aaronleland]

No. They were delaying the negotiations as a way to punish Carter. They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day.

Based on....?

Carter's perceived support of the Shah. While it was claimed that he only came to the US for medical treatment, the hostage takers perceived it as US support of him. He died just months before Reagan was elected.

 

[M14 Shooter]

No. They were delaying the negotiations as a way to punish Carter. They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day.

Based on....?

Carter's perceived support of the Shah. While it was claimed that he only came to the US for medical treatment, the hostage takers perceived it as US support of him. He died just months before Reagan was elected.

So, your statement that They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day is your supposition, as opposed to something supported by specific fact.
Thank you.

 

[mudwhistle]

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

So you think it was merely coincidence? Hmm.

What happened? Reagan's inaugural speech frightened Iran into submission? Kinda like how Reagan's "tear down this wall" speech magically caused the Soviet Union to collapse?

No. They were delaying the negotiations as a way to punish Carter. They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day.

Yeah, even if Carter won.

That would teach him.

Nobody expected Carter to win if the hostages weren't released. As evidenced by Reagan's landslide victory.

Yeah, .........what you said?

The release of the hostages became a non-issue once Carter flubbed the rescue.

 

[NLT]

Carter is correct

America looked at him as weak and ineffective in dealing with the Iran embarassment. If he had played tough guy, launched an attack and kicked some Iranian butt...the country would have rallied around him

But with 30 years hindsight, it is obvious that Carter was correct. We ended up getting all our hostages back alive and unharmed. That would not have happened if Carter had attacked

carter was wrong abut everything during his presidency. He has learned nothing. The fact that he even feels the need to say somehting like this today is simply pitiful. He didnt get trounced in the last major landslide because he wasnt tough on Iran.

I guess it depends what you consider a "success"

1. Is a success getting 52 American hostages home alive and unharmed?
2. Is a success having the US look strong on the global stage

If you consider #1 to be a success, then Jimmy Carter was a success
If you consider #2 to be a success, then Carter was a failure

Carter had nothing to do with getting those hostages home, Iran was fucking scared shit less that Ronnie was going to drop the hammer on them and they let they hostages go

 

[aaronleland]

No. They were delaying the negotiations as a way to punish Carter. They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day.

Based on....?

Carter's perceived support of the Shah. While it was claimed that he only came to the US for medical treatment, the hostage takers perceived it as US support of him. He died just months before Reagan was elected.

So, your statement that They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day is your supposition, as opposed to something supported by specific fact.
Thank you.

Mitt Romney says the Iranians released hostages in 1981 because they feared Ronald Reagan s approach to foreign policy PolitiFact

So Reagan, not Carter, got to bask in the glow of the hostages’ safe return. However, we contacted seven scholars of the period, and their consensus was that neither Reagan nor his philosophy played any significant role in freeing the hostages.

"Well before Reagan became president, the deal for releasing the hostages had already been worked out by the Carter administration's State Department and the Iranians, ably assisted by Algerian diplomats," said David Farber, a Temple University historian and author of Taken Hostage: The Iranian Hostage Crisis andAmerica's First Encounter with Radical Islam.

"No Reagan administration officials participated in the successful negotiations," Farber added. "The Iranian government waited to officially release the Americans until Carter had left the presidency as a final insult to Carter, whom they despised. They believed Carter had betrayed the Iranian revolution by allowing the self-exiled Shah to receive medical attention in the United States and then had threatened their new government by attempting, unsuccessfully, to use military force in April 1980 to free the hostages."

 

[Ibentoken]

The left will never admit it was Reagan who got the hostages released.

 

[rightwinger]

Carter is correct

America looked at him as weak and ineffective in dealing with the Iran embarassment. If he had played tough guy, launched an attack and kicked some Iranian butt...the country would have rallied around him

But with 30 years hindsight, it is obvious that Carter was correct. We ended up getting all our hostages back alive and unharmed. That would not have happened if Carter had attacked

carter was wrong abut everything during his presidency. He has learned nothing. The fact that he even feels the need to say somehting like this today is simply pitiful. He didnt get trounced in the last major landslide because he wasnt tough on Iran.

I guess it depends what you consider a "success"

1. Is a success getting 52 American hostages home alive and unharmed?
2. Is a success having the US look strong on the global stage

If you consider #1 to be a success, then Jimmy Carter was a success
If you consider #2 to be a success, then Carter was a failure

Carter had nothing to do with getting those hostages home, Iran was fucking scared shit less that Ronnie was going to drop the hammer on them and they let they hostages go

Save us from your fantasies

Reagan was in office all of two hours when they were released. What was Ronnie going to do? bomb them?

 

[rightwinger]

The left will never admit it was Reagan who got the hostages released.

What did he do to get them released?

 

[Ibentoken]

The left will never admit it was Reagan who got the hostages released.

What did he do to get them released?

Took the oath of the President of the United States. Didn't you see it on TV?

 

[Antares]

The left will never admit it was Reagan who got the hostages released.

What did he do to get them released?

LOL, I am sure Jimmy appreciates your revisionist point of view.

 

[Stephanie]

The left will never admit it was Reagan who got the hostages released.

of course not, but they still spike Bin ladens head for their dear leader, obambam

 

[Freewill]

The left will never admit it was Reagan who got the hostages released.

What did he do to get them released?

Not be the dimwitted Carter.

 

[Freewill]

Carter is correct

America looked at him as weak and ineffective in dealing with the Iran embarassment. If he had played tough guy, launched an attack and kicked some Iranian butt...the country would have rallied around him

But with 30 years hindsight, it is obvious that Carter was correct. We ended up getting all our hostages back alive and unharmed. That would not have happened if Carter had attacked

carter was wrong abut everything during his presidency. He has learned nothing. The fact that he even feels the need to say somehting like this today is simply pitiful. He didnt get trounced in the last major landslide because he wasnt tough on Iran.

I guess it depends what you consider a "success"

1. Is a success getting 52 American hostages home alive and unharmed?
2. Is a success having the US look strong on the global stage

If you consider #1 to be a success, then Jimmy Carter was a success
If you consider #2 to be a success, then Carter was a failure

Carter had nothing to do with getting those hostages home, Iran was fucking scared shit less that Ronnie was going to drop the hammer on them and they let they hostages go

Save us from your fantasies

Reagan was in office all of two hours when they were released. What was Ronnie going to do? bomb them?

Reagan should have gotten the Nobel Peace prize for getting them released without firing a shot.

 

[Ibentoken]

Carter is correct

America looked at him as weak and ineffective in dealing with the Iran embarassment. If he had played tough guy, launched an attack and kicked some Iranian butt...the country would have rallied around him

But with 30 years hindsight, it is obvious that Carter was correct. We ended up getting all our hostages back alive and unharmed. That would not have happened if Carter had attacked

carter was wrong abut everything during his presidency. He has learned nothing. The fact that he even feels the need to say somehting like this today is simply pitiful. He didnt get trounced in the last major landslide because he wasnt tough on Iran.

I guess it depends what you consider a "success"

1. Is a success getting 52 American hostages home alive and unharmed?
2. Is a success having the US look strong on the global stage

If you consider #1 to be a success, then Jimmy Carter was a success
If you consider #2 to be a success, then Carter was a failure

Carter had nothing to do with getting those hostages home, Iran was fucking scared shit less that Ronnie was going to drop the hammer on them and they let they hostages go

Save us from your fantasies

Reagan was in office all of two hours when they were released. What was Ronnie going to do? bomb them?

Reagan should have gotten the Nobel Peace prize for getting them released without firing a shot.

Carter is correct

America looked at him as weak and ineffective in dealing with the Iran embarassment. If he had played tough guy, launched an attack and kicked some Iranian butt...the country would have rallied around him

But with 30 years hindsight, it is obvious that Carter was correct. We ended up getting all our hostages back alive and unharmed. That would not have happened if Carter had attacked

carter was wrong abut everything during his presidency. He has learned nothing. The fact that he even feels the need to say somehting like this today is simply pitiful. He didnt get trounced in the last major landslide because he wasnt tough on Iran.

I guess it depends what you consider a "success"

1. Is a success getting 52 American hostages home alive and unharmed?
2. Is a success having the US look strong on the global stage

If you consider #1 to be a success, then Jimmy Carter was a success
If you consider #2 to be a success, then Carter was a failure

Carter had nothing to do with getting those hostages home, Iran was fucking scared shit less that Ronnie was going to drop the hammer on them and they let they hostages go

Save us from your fantasies

Reagan was in office all of two hours when they were released. What was Ronnie going to do? bomb them?

Reagan should have gotten the Nobel Peace prize for getting them released without firing a shot.

Yes.