Amazon.com Widgets

Do you agree with Marco Rubio that no concessions should have been made to release hostages?

  • No responses have been submitted.
  • Grow up Marco

    The hostages wouldn't have been released without concessions, that's how negotions work. He just wants to blame Obama for something else. If his position is that we shouldn't concede anything, they would still be hostages and Obama would be blamed for that too. Should we just have asked more strongly? Bombed Iran?

  • Marco Rubio proves his inexperience with comments like this

    Our government owes it to its citizens to do everything deemed necessary to free them from prosecution by rogue nations. Getting the Iranian prisoners released was historic and it's sad that Rubio's first instinct was to put down the administration for getting them released. To put your political ambition before your country is reprehensible to me. That's why the GOP is becoming obsolete. They don't come together and stand behind our leader at any time, for fear of looking weak. It's just ridiculous.

  • Human lives are more precious that political careers

    Marco Rubio is an ignorant piece of waste from America's dysfunctional political machine. Human lives are more precious than political sound bites and campaign poll results. I agree that negotiating with terrorist has its pitfalls, if one of Rubio's relatives was among the hostages, I am sure the would have adopted a much more humane approach to the situation.

  • Force speaks loudly

    Giving concessions to those who take hostages just allows for the air that taking hostages is an acceptable plan of action for criminals. We often say it is unfair to the hostages themselves to put them at risk of harm, but a few violent conclusions to criminals lives after taking hostages would hault any plans of hostage taking in the future.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.