CNN "Trump backs off false Iran video claim"

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/05/politics/donald-trump-iran-video-claim/ ^ | 8/5/2016

[Tau Food]

Do you say is is not ransom, if the kidnapping was undertaken in order to encourage an old debt to be settled?

I think that this intent issue matters at all only because if the intent was to pay ransom, then there is likely to be more kidnappings. That is why we have a policy against paying ransom. We don't want to encourage future kidnappings.

Therefore, it is the intent of the payor that matters. Only the payor can pay future ransoms. The payee cannot pay future ransoms.

In other words, if I am considering whether I should kidnap Americans for ransom next week, I care only about the payor's attitude about paying ransom. What another kidnapper might think is irrelevant to my decision.

[Cboldt]

I get it now, thanks. Any country who we owe a debt to, or who claims we owe a debt, is free to kidnap. That does narrow the risk to Americans somewhat.

For those kidnapped in furtherance of collecing on a claim might be freed, but never by payment of ransom.

[stylin19a]

I like that better.

[Tau Food]

Well, that’s an interesting way to look at it. The good news is that we don’t usually refuse to pay what we owe. Those who hold our notes have been getting paid on time.

[Cboldt]

I think Argentina has a claim under dispute. Kidnapping Americans might speed up resolution. No ransom involved, so its all legal.

[RedEyeJack]

It was not ransom... It was “Tribute”.

[Tau Food]

Well, if there is that risk, then we should do all that we can to tell Argentina that we won’t pay money in exchange for kidnapped Americans.

[Cboldt]

-- Well, if there is that risk, then we should do all that we can to tell Argentina that we won't pay money in exchange for kidnapped Americans. --

It's our policy to not pay ransom. I don't think we have to tell them that.

My point is just on how "ransom" is defined. You exclude from ransom, payments that also settle a debt. I think that is too confining. Not that our discussion matters either, the world can see what the administration is willing to do. What is said, meh, not so important.

[Tau Food]

My point is just on how "ransom" is defined. You exclude from ransom, payments that also settle a debt. I think that is too confining. Not that our discussion matters either, the world can see what the administration is willing to do. What is said, meh, not so important.

You're right. Everyone can interpret past events in whatever way they want. I feel that it is in the best interest of the American people (the potential kidnapees) that bad actors believe that they will not be rewarded for future kidnappings. That's why we have the policy that we have.

[odawg]

“I suspected his allegiance to the Clintons as a motivating factor.”

Are you the caller who told Limbaugh that Trump wants to help Hillary become president so he can build a building in Washington D.C. and in Cuba?

Trump has the presidency within his grasp, but he agrees to give it to Hillary in return for a coke and a cookie.

[Ohioan]

When you are interacting with provocative people on interview shows, it is impossible to always recognize what they are addressing at a given moment, in a vast contextual scan of related & similar incidents, so as not to respond inappropriately to an occasional question.

The problem here is those "politics as usual" Party types, who are afraid of where our free spirited candidate may be taking them. The media plays them like a fiddle, and then exaggerates the reactions of those political hacks, to increase the concern level of all of us.

We need to harden our resistance to being played by propagandists. Certainly it is better to do that than simply kiss America good-bye, by allowing ourselves to be played in this manner.