bobfai wrote, "Khadafi has been a non factor compared to other Arab outlaws since Reagan went after him"
Tell that to the families of the victims of Pan Am Flight 103, blown up by Khadafi *after* Reagan went after him.
"I do not think we can use western logic when trying to figure out Iran"
Then why have you been so cocksure of yourself that Iran was quaking in their shoes that Reagan was coming after them?
Sorry, bobfai, I can barely hear you anymore. Radio contact is fading the farther I get from your planet. I'll be back on planet Earth by this time tomorrow. If I don't get another chance to say goodbye, it's been fun.
Khadafi has been a non factor compared to other Arab outlaws since Reagan went after him and he just turned in his badge recently. I don't know if reagan 's attack was effective but it seems like he changed his cource over the long run. I do not think we can use western logic when trying to figure out Iran---their object probably was not to cause a difference in the election but like you said toshow they could stand aginst the good in the West and beat their chest and when they got tired of it and saw a new opponent coming to power that might cause them trouble they decided to get out with their winnings and live to play another day---
bobfai, if Iran preferred Carter to Reagan, why did they act in a way that greatly increased Reagan's chances of winning? Why did they help elect a man they were afraid of? It makes no sense.
Khadafi didn't "crawl in a hole" after Reagan bombed him. He blew up Pan Am Flight 103.
bobfai, this is all symptomatic. You remember things in a way that fits your neat ideological view of the world instead of how they really happened.
None of what you said makes any sense and the world works in basic ways.Iran gave up the hostages for a reason ---they did not kill them for a reason---I think it was because they did not want to deal with reagan. If they wanted to change the election why would they want reagan the Hawk vs Carter the peace maker?--Khaddafy crawled in a hole after the bombing and he knew he was a target from then on---The Taliban was so dis organized that we never expected them to give up OBL we just decided to kill them as quick as we could while we looked for OBL---Sadam screwed up and he knows that now.---I think Iran feared the Hawk and they knew the dove.---naive?---no but not know it all closed minded.
Sure shows you that the Iranians didn't have to fear Reagan.. Like Scatter said, the release on the day of the inauguration served Iran's purpose.
Once again, The Iranians knew that as long as the hostages were alive Carter would not attack nor would Reagan. Reagan never threatened.
Are you just making this stuff up??? I think so!
bobfai wrote, "My feeling at the time was that they did not know Reagan or what he would do so they released the hostages."
And that's a really naive view of how the world works.
Khaddafy didn't know how Reagan would react. Did he give up his terrorist ways, even after Reagan sent bombers his way? No.
The Taliban didn't know how Bush would react. Did they give up bin Laden? No.
Saddam Hussein didn't know how Bush would react. (Or maybe he did since Bush had already invaded Afghanistan.) Did Hussein give up his WMD? (OK, bad analogy, because we now know that Saddam did just that.)
Why in the world do you think Iran drew such a sharp distinction between one US politician and another when most people in the US can't tell them apart?
bobfai asked, "It happened the hostages were released ---do you think it was because Jimmy Carter said please?"
You didn't say whether you want help getting back to the planet Earth, but I'll take your question as a sincere attempt for help. So, I'll answer.
No, the Iranians didn't release the hostages as a favor to Carter. Nor as a favor to Reagan. The hostages had served their purpose. They showed that Iran could stand up to the great Satan, even influence the election and get the voters to reject the US President. By releasing the hostages during the transition, the Iranians got rid of an issue that would have clouded any future dealings with the US without anyone being able to say they backed down to American power or intimidation.
That's the most likely scenario. Now, there are some crazies out there who still believe that Reagan had struck a deal with Iran to hold the hostages until after the election and he had won, in return for favors later (like the arms deal that we now know Reagan secretly arranged with Iran later). But they are just crazies who believe that and I would give them no nevermind.
Fantasy???It happened the hostages were released ---do you think it was because Jimmy Carter said please? >>
It sure wasn't because of Reagan. Scatter showed you what he did in Lebanon and you keep saying Iran feared him? bobfai, you need help. I don't have that much time. sorry!!