Appeasing Iran . . .
by Norman Adams on July 15, 2009 at 9:32 AM
Remember the Iran-Contra affair? This was the big "scandal" of the Reagan Administration and the Administration's low point.
In essence, the individuals involved traded arms to Iran for hostages (in this case, living hostages). In addition, funds from the arms sales were diverted to fund "contras" fighting Marxist governments in Central America.
25 years on, the deal seems almost quaint in a budget-saving sort of way (Would the government even bother to use "profits" from arms sales in such a way today? I mean what's a few million dollars in the midsts of trillion dollar bailouts?).
Fast-forward to Obama's trade to Iran for hostages. He's not trading arms. He's trading Iranian terrorists responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers. So far, Iran has rewarded him with the corpses of two Bristish hostages for his efforts.
Andy McCarthy with National Review has the essential "need to know" facts on the release of the "Irbil Five," whom various news outlets are describing as Iranian "diplomats."
Why isn't this a scandal of the highest caliber? Do I even need to answer?
Whether or not it ever brings condemnation and shame to the Obama administration, you can rest assured that two groups have taken notice.
First, our troops have noticed. What sort impact will this have on morale - knowing that their Commander-in-Chief is willing to release these murderers with the blood of their brothers-in-arms on their hands?
Second, our enemies have noticed. No ransom is too high. Just wait until they get a nuclear bomb.
How long will ignorance and childishness govern our foreign policy? I'm almost tempted to cry, "Where's Hillary?"