The weird “kid-glove” approach the US has been taking on this Iran-hostage situation seems clearer now that an odd coincidence of events has been brought to light.
Looking at the facts only helps a little at understanding what might’ve really gone down.
Facts are one thing. Anybody can accept facts. It’s the conclusions drawn from them – the patterns – that require belief. Faith.
It’s for this reason that people of different political alignments, different cultures or different religions can’t see eye to eye on some things. They can look at the same sets of facts and come away with radically different conclusions.
Look at these events and see if you see a pattern or a coincidence::
Iranian diplomat abducted on February 4 by elite Iraqi Army unit:
British sailors abducted on March 23:
Iranian diplomat released on April 4:
British Sailors released on April 5:
And now Sharafi’s making noise about being tortured by proxies of the CIA. The pattern is there for those who want to see it: It looks clear that a Commando unit that works with the US snatched their guy, Iran schemed and snatched the sailors, and the whole mess was quietly resolved over the last week by under-the-table deals and plausible deniability.
Here’s the thing – it doesn’t make much sense. Why would we let the guy go when it only makes us look weaker? Even if the public won’t buy the story of the Iranians, the Iranians would still see us as open to negotiating. Not just negotiating – negotiating for troops that /aren’t even ours/.
Sorting out the facts of a counter-intelligence operation just stands to make the public confused. Feeling the results is the way to judge whether it went down or not.
Before deciding whether America traded favors for hostages – and it can happen, remember the Algiers Accords – decide whether the release of a hostage few people in the world knew about for hostages that were turning the world against Iran would be worthwhile to the US.