serious answers to get a "Best Answer"
2007-09-16 18:27:43 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think you may be referring to Regan who got the credit for the release of the hostages though Carter was the one who worked hard for the release even sacrificing the Presidency for them. He knew Iran would not release the prisoners as long as he was President.
I'd have to say that I really don't know. I want peace to be in that region but I'd have to see what the cost of that peace is going to be first.
2007-09-16 18:36:00 · answer #1 · answered by Jackie Oh! 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
As a somewhat Liberal Independant, I support the recommendation of the Iraq Study Group that calls for regional peace negotiations to decide the future makeup of Iraq. Bush has rejected this.
I'm not particularly comfortable with a candidate attempting this on their own - it's also probably illegal, although talking with them might be ok.
I recently read "President Reagan, role of a lifetime," (scary book,) and do not believe Reagan interferred - at all - with any ongoing hostage negotiations.
2007-09-17 02:16:57 · answer #2 · answered by Just an American 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I thinking 'bout the Ronald Reagan Republicans that were running around Tehran during the US Embassy hostage event.
I mean, ... Really... when the cons had made deals with the Iran Govt to hold the us hostages till the inauguration night to screw the Dem's. .. . displays a sick mind set.
the qualification of this event was the BS Iran/contra investigation.
2007-09-17 01:52:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
assuming it was a reasonable deal then yes it would be nice to have a president that is serious about diplomacy. As for Reagan what he did was awful because it kept those Americans in capitivity for longer then needed in order to embarass carter
2007-09-17 01:39:34 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You mean like Ronald Reagan did in 1980.
2007-09-17 01:47:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would have to say NO, after seeing how Reagan's worked out.
2007-09-17 01:33:34 · answer #6 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Peace? Over what? Iraq? Are we to go to the Iranians hat-in-hand and ask them for peace in Iraq?
Something like this: "Oh, please, great mullahs, stop training Iraqis to kill American soldiers and marines in Iraq - please, pretty please!"?
Not Iraq? Well, then, I suggest you expand a bit on your thought 'cause otherwise I have no earthly idea why any American would be talking to the Iranians about "peace". (Read: peace in place of what?)
2007-09-17 01:40:59 · answer #7 · answered by Fast Eddie B 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I can't say for sure if I would vote for that person, but I wouldn't automatically eliminate that person from my list. They would have my consideration for a vote.
2007-09-17 01:32:19 · answer #8 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
never!
2007-09-17 01:32:28 · answer #9 · answered by el toro 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋