I’m sympathetic. I could see myself doing something similar. I’ve definitely wandered around in dangerous locations, including hiking in unstable border zones. I wonder if I had been killed, Dopers would have blamed me for being there in the first place. I mean, I like to think I would stay away from the Iranian border if I were near it, but…yeah, I don’t know.
In this case I think it is possible that the Iranian government is correct and that they were spying. To continue on their hiking foray after being warned not to by the locals, including the inn keeper where they were staying and the local police, suggests an agenda of some kind. There are important aspects to the story that are missing. Keeping it a case of ‘those dumb kids on a hike’ serve the cause of both sides.
How sure are we that they actually were over the border? If they were spies, yeah, the CIA would leave them hung out to dry. And if the Iranians crossed the border and scooped up the hikers in Iraq, I wouldn’t expect them to admit it, either. I don’t see either side as being particularly credible.
I fell a certain minimal sympathy for them, like anyone who takes a risk for the thrill of it and loses. Sucks that they lost, but it wasn’t a NECESSARY risk. Like mountain climbers who die on Mt. Everest. Sucks that they die, but it was their choice.
Also, I found myself wondering if they were actually CIA. If they WERE CIA, they’d have my full sympathy, doing a dangerous job and all. But the point is, if I were wondering if they were CIA, I can IMAGINE how suspicious the Iranians would be. So, red flag. Bull. If they weren’t CIA, they were asking for it, and got it. Still sucks, but damn …
I’d feel more sympathy for them if, like Captor and ghardester, I didn’t have a sneaky suspicion there was more to it.
Unlike Captor, my sympathy for the CIA is … much less than if they’d just been stupid. I don’t think I could adequately express how much less. “Not piss on them if they were on fire” might come close.
Contrary to what is often asserted on the board, most countries even ones with “evil, dangerous and crazy regimes” are far too busy to care about some guy who wandered over into their territory. Most likely what happens is they either quietly send them back across or they deport them. Too much bother otherwise.
Insert yourself into your scenario. Are you gonna go wandering in Compton? No - becasuse in the scenario, just or fair or not, you end up dead. We live in the real world and there are real consequences for decisions we make, and they don’t always favor the pure of heart.
These hikers were not only gambling with their safety, but with the danger of creating an international incident. They have become another complication in an already complex situation in Iran and Iraq as it relates to the West. Now they have become pawns, and ultimately we will have to sacrifice a few pawns of our own (in the grand chess game) to get them back. The diplomamatic capital burned up to free these dunderheads could have been used for something more producitve.
This may be off-topic, but, how does the above attitude compare with people’s attitude towards victims of some proverbial crimes, like walking in a bad part of town at night and being mugged (for a guy) or raped (for a woman)?
I always think that in such cases both the aggressor and the victim share some responsibility. The aggressor for being an asshole and breaking the law, but also the victim for taking actions that were too risky, given the reality on the ground.
This seems to be what people are saying for these hikers. The Iranians are assholes and but the victims are also to blame for taking actions that were too risky, given the reality on the ground.
However, in the walking in a bad part of town at night and being attacked situation, it seems to me that most people absolve the victim of any blame, especially in cases of rape.
I have a strong suspicion they they really were spies, in which case my sympathy is pretty much nil. If they were just stupid then I feel much more sympathy; yes, people shouldn’t do stupid things, but one of the problems with stupid behavior is the penalties tend to be severely disproportionate.
First point: the world is what it is-you may not like this, but you cannot change it.
Second, did these fools ever stop to consider just how stupid a stunt they were planning?
Third, they are playing into the hands of Ahmadinadjad and his crazy friends-now the regime is $500,000 richer, thanks to these imbeciles.
It’s kinda like the warnings on a bottle of poison-drink this and you will die.
Unfortunately, these three were too stupid (or willful) to read the warning label.
Sure it’s easy to feel bad for people that do stupid things, but how many times is this gonna have to happen. If I go sit next to a bonfire and I get a spark on my clothes, sure everyone feels bad I got burned. But you have to expect those kinds of things.
It’s like having a kid. You have to protect them, but it does no one any good to contantly bail them out. They have to learn
I remember a story about a woman in south africa who decided the seals were cute. She was going to pet one. Instead she got her nose bitten off.
People are animals. Dont feed the bears. Dont pet the seals. Dont walk into the Iranians lair.
During a trip across the US that my brother and I took we were pretty close to Flint. Was there something in Flint that we couldnt see in Buffalo, New York or any number of other cities? Was there something in the mountains of Iran that was missing in the nearby mountains? Why did they need to go there?
I can feel sympathy that they will perhaps pay out of scale for their willful stupidity, but they failed to properly manage their risks. Now they are feeding the bears.
They were looking for adventure and they found it. Sympathy doesn’t play a part. If, for example, they had discovered some lost city and become rich and famous during their travels what would they owe us? Nothing, same thing we owe them when their risk doesn’t pan out.
I do feel sorry for their families who are forced to deal with the consequences.