Should we be talking to Iran and Syria?

[foggedinn]

Yes we should be talking to them, not with the object of solving any particular immediate problem, but to build a long term multigenerational relationship. The solution of any immediate problem would just be serendipity.

We happen to be a country whose citizens think that 2 years is a long term investment. I believe we should be viewing it in terms of 20 years being a short term investment of time and energy. Look past the current regimes in both counties and the problems du jour, and begin to build long term dialouge.

Unless the premillenial dispensationalist christians are right and Jesus is due for an immediate return, we will be dealing with both countries for a long time. We really should start acting like it.

 

[Libsmasher]

Jimmy Carter appeasement? Realy what did Carter give them?

Not (particularly) Iran - in his four years in office before the american people had a chance to get rid of him, in an electoral landslide, Carter engaged in a worldwide policy of disarm, concede, withdraw, give up, abandon, betray - unparalleled in american history.

I mean besides the whole money and arms thing.....wait that Was Reagon, the Republican God. no Carter sent in the Delta Force...

That was Oliver North - O clueless one, and it was an exchange for cash for an arms shipment of no particular strategic consequence in exchange for money to help the anti-communist guerillas in Nicaragua, who had been abandoned by the commie-loving democrat-controlled congress of that time.

and somehow gets the blame becuse it failed due to Sandstorms that arise in the the area in the the air that knocked out the choppers ....Because we all know that the President should be knowing all those kinda details, selecting the guns used, and micro manage the military operations.

BLLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH HA HA HEEE HEEEEEEEE CHORTLE GIGGLE YAAAAA HEEE HEE HARRR YUK!!!!

The feeble, pathetic effort by Carter, ridiculous from the beginning, failed because of poorly trained troops using ill-maintained equipment, that in turn because of Carter's devastating hollowing out of the US military.

And yes , its a great win for Iran if the Dems win....even though Republican Bush took out 2 of Iran's enemies,

The one enemy, Saddam, unfortunately had a habit of invading all kinds of countries (it was in all the papers - miss it?) and the other enemy exists only in your fevered skull.

stretched out forces so we cant threaten Iran,

Whoa, hol' on there - an appeaser distraught about not being able to "threaten" Iran? That takes the cake!

butchered the peace process

Whaaaaatttt??

and left Hezboallah and Hamas with more Power then when he took office....

WHAAAAAAAATTTTT?? As if anti-semitic appeasers care how much power the islamofascists have!

I am sure if Iran could do it, they would form a coup and Put Bush in charge for a third term.

Not a chance - with Obamacarter with the best shot to take over, they know they probably don't have to lift a finger to end up with the perfect setup for their aggressive designs. When they see the Obamoonie rallies on TV, they probably laugh at their good fortune, and wonder at the infinte blessings of Allah on islamofascists.

Bush has failed us 100% on Iran

Nonsense.

Obama I don't know if he has the balls to do what may be needed, but he has the brains at least to get us closer

.

YAAAAA HEEE HEE HARRR YUK CACKLE HA HA HEEE HEEEEEEEE GIGGLE CHORTLE GIGGLE YAAAAA HEEE HARRR YUK CACKLE HA HA HEEE HEEEEEEEE GIGGLE CHORTLE GIGGLE YAAAAA HEEE HEE HARRR YUK CACKLE HA HA HEEE HEEEEEEEE GIGGLE CHORTLE GIGGLE YAAAAA HEEE HEE HARRR YUK CACKLE HA HA HEEE HEEEEEEEE GIGGLE CHORTLE YAAAAA HEEE HEE HARRR YUK CACKLE HA HA HEEE HEEEEEEEE GIGGLE CHORTLE GIGGLE YAAAAA HEEE HEE HARRR YUK CACKLE HA HEEE HEEEEEEEE GIGGLE CHORTLE GIGGLE YAAAAA HEEE HEE HARRR YUK CACKLE HA HA HEEE HEEEEEEEE CHORTLE GIGGLE YAAAAA HEEE HEE HARRR YUK CACKLE HA HA HEEE HEEEEEEEE GIGGLE CHORTLE GIGGLE YAAAAA HEEE HEE HARRR YUK CACKLE HA

McCain knows enough not to get to "bring um on" when playing with American Troops lives.

What does THAT mean? Speak english. BIZARRE - a hysterically funny post from you ending in incoherence.

 

[Libsmasher]

Yes we should be talking to them, not with the object of solving any particular immediate problem, but to build a long term multigenerational relationship.

Whaaaaaatttt?

The solution of any immediate problem would just be serendipity.

More like a total impossibility.

We happen to be a country whose citizens think that 2 years is a long term investment. I believe we should be viewing it in terms of 20 years being a short term investment of time and energy. Look past the current regimes in both counties and the problems du jour, and begin to build long term dialouge.

A preposterous notion - regimes in the middle east, the most unstable place in the world, can't be approached as if they were J P Morgan. Look how much the world has changed in the last 20 years.

Unless the premillenial dispensationalist christians are right and Jesus is due for an immediate return, we will be dealing with both countries for a long time. We really should start acting like it.

How are we not "acting like it"? The iranian regime could be dumped in five years by young people tired of living in a theocracy - then having dealt with the former dictators would only make countries who did it look bad in their eyes. You have a confused, invalid approach.

 

[bododie]

Here is a soon-to-be nuclear armed country which will spend maybe a week sucking up Iraq after the expected cut-and-run of a democrat US president, and then places like saudi arabia can expect to be next on the menu.

Well... then at that point we probably shouldn't bother to talk, 'cause I doubt there will be anyone left to talk to after we're done with them. But until then, it's the best option.

 

[sun tzu]

But honestly, what would we lose from diplomatic conversations with Iran? Even if they don't accomplish anything, we can say we tried, and therefore be able to rally the people behind the theoretical war much more effectively, because as we have learned time and again, America cannot win a war without the people's support.

And at best, we could avert the whole conflict and make serious progress in stabilizing the middle east, or at least lowering terrorism down to what it was before our idiotic invasion of Iraq.

 

[sun tzu]

The biggest bag of crap I've seen in one pragraph, and HERE, that's really saying something. The shiites are a majority in iraq, they are the major component of the current iraq government - the sunnis couldn't do squat to prevent an iran take over. Again, the repetion of this al qaeda in iraq crap - ONCE again, al qaeda in iraq was crushed, by the decmation of their leadership, and the destruction of their strong points in anbar province by the coalition forces working with the sheiks who were tired of them - y'all need to go back and read some 2007 newspapers.

ha, Al Qaeda and its smaller counterparts still have a very formidable position in Iraq. And though the sunnis are a minority, I don't doubt for a second that they would (do) cause some major problems. the Sunni Awakening Group, a Sunni militia formed by the U.S. is a group of thousands of former Sunni insurgents, armed by the U.S. They could cause Iran some major problems

 

[PLC1]

ha, Al Qaeda and its smaller counterparts still have a very formidable position in Iraq. And though the sunnis are a minority, I don't doubt for a second that they would (do) cause some major problems. the Sunni Awakening Group, a Sunni militia formed by the U.S. is a group of thousands of former Sunni insurgents, armed by the U.S. They could cause Iran some major problems

Al Qaeda do indeed have a formidable position in Iraq. Al Qaeda Iraq dates to, when? Is it about 2003, or 2004? There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq prior to the US invasion.

I hadn't heard of the Sunni Awakening Group, so I looked it up here:

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/76781/

It could cause some problems for Iran, for the US, for the US supported government in Iraq, for a lot of people.

 

[foggedinn]

Whaaaaaatttt?

More like a total impossibility.

A preposterous notion - regimes in the middle east, the most unstable place in the world, can't be approached as if they were J P Morgan. Look how much the world has changed in the last 20 years.

How are we not "acting like it"? The iranian regime could be dumped in five years by young people tired of living in a theocracy - then having dealt with the former dictators would only make countries who did it look bad in their eyes. You have a confused, invalid approach.

1) You think very short term
2) It's beem my experience that with God, nothing is imposible
3)It's my view, that J.P.Morgan will be here today gone tomorrow. Iran(Persia) has been a power in that part of the world since before Nebuchadezzer.
4) get you head out of the sand

 

[Libsmasher]

1) You think very short term

Thinking other than short term in a rapidly changing region is irrational.

2) It's beem my experience that with God, nothing is imposible

As I am an agnostic, I will withhold comment on that.

3)It's my view, that J.P.Morgan will be here today gone tomorrow. Iran(Persia) has been a power in that part of the world since before Nebuchadezzer.

3A. The current islamic Republic goes all the way back to 1979.

3B. Iran was founded in 1925.

3C. J P Morgan was founded in 1823.

3D. Get a clue.

4) get you head out of the sand

Read at least ten pages of a history book.

 

[Libsmasher]

Al Qaeda do indeed have a formidable position in Iraq. Al Qaeda Iraq dates to, when? Is it about 2003, or 2004? There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq prior to the US invasion.

I hadn't heard of the Sunni Awakening Group, so I looked it up here:

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/76781/

It could cause some problems for Iran, for the US, for the US supported government in Iraq, for a lot of people.

Since you appeasers can't stomach the possibility of the US not being defeated in Iraq, you are inventing wholesale replacements of reality.

From the documented wiki entry for iraq:

Since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, elements at first loosely associated with al-Qaeda, commanded by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, have supported local resistance to the occupying coalition forces and the emerging government, particularly targeting Iraq's Shia majority.[137] They have been implicated in the bombing of the United Nations headquarters in Iraq,[138] as well as hundreds of other small and large scale attacks on the military and civilian targets.[139] Eventually, al-Zarqawi claimed allegiance to bin Laden in October 2004.

Al-Zarqawi was killed by U.S. air strikes on a safe house near Baqubah on June 7, 2006. Before his death, he was allegedly trying to use Iraq as a launching pad for international terrorism, most notably dispatching suicide bombers to attack hotels and government targets in Jordan.[140] Since the killing of al-Zarqawi, it was believed that Abu Ayyub al-Masri took over as head of "al-Qaeda in Iraq". On September 3, 2006 the second-in-command of "al-Qaeda in Iraq", Hamed Jumaa Farid al-Saeedi (also known as Abu Humam or Abu Rana), was arrested north of Baghdad, along with a group of his aides and followers.[141]

In a 39 page document retrieved in November and a 16 page document retrieved in October gives insight on how Al-Qaeda in Iraq is in panic and fear. The documents reveal how local fighters are being mistreated by the foreign fighters and labeled as "scoundrels, sectarians, and non-believers." Abu-Tariq, states that the number of fighters has dwindled from 600 to 20 fighters. [142]

It's the most bitter pill for an appeaser to swallow, I know, but al qaeda in Iraq has been crushed. Deal with it.

 

[Dr.Who]

But honestly, what would we lose from diplomatic conversations with Iran? Even if they don't accomplish anything, we can say we tried, and therefore be able to rally the people behind the theoretical war much more effectively, because as we have learned time and again, America cannot win a war without the people's support.

And at best, we could avert the whole conflict and make serious progress in stabilizing the middle east, or at least lowering terrorism down to what it was before our idiotic invasion of Iraq.

I see no harm in talking as you have described it. I think the fear is that too many people know that talking as some of our politicians do it is actually appeasement.

 

[PLC1]

Since you appeasers can't stomach the possibility of the US not being defeated in Iraq, you are inventing wholesale replacements of reality.

You deniers seem to like to use meaningless political terms like "appeasers" Well, if you must, but it adds nothing to the discussion.

Read my posts. I've never advocated leaving Iraq to the terrorists.

It's the most bitter pill for an appeaser to swallow, I know, but al qaeda in Iraq has been crushed. Deal with it.

In whose alternate reality has Al Qaeda Iraq been "crushed"? Must be another dimension.

 

[Libsmasher]

You deniers seem to like to use meaningless political terms like "appeasers" Well, if you must, but it adds nothing to the discussion.

In whose alternate reality has Al Qaeda Iraq been "crushed"? Must be another dimension.

I've presented the proof (one hardly needs proof, practically everyone in the world other than you is aware of it ) scarcely a few lines above - can't you READ??

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Not (particularly) Iran - in his four years in office before the american people had a chance to get rid of him, in an electoral landslide, Carter engaged in a worldwide policy of disarm, concede, withdraw, give up, abandon, betray - unparalleled in american history.



That was Oliver North - O clueless one, and it was an exchange for cash for an arms shipment of no particular strategic consequence in exchange for money to help the anti-communist guerillas in Nicaragua, who had been abandoned by the commie-loving democrat-controlled congress of that time.



BLLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH HA HA HEEE HEEEEEEEE CHORTLE GIGGLE YAAAAA HEEE HEE HARRR YUK!!!!

The feeble, pathetic effort by Carter, ridiculous from the beginning, failed because of poorly trained troops using ill-maintained equipment, that in turn because of Carter's devastating hollowing out of the US military.



The one enemy, Saddam, unfortunately had a habit of invading all kinds of countries (it was in all the papers - miss it?) and the other enemy exists only in your fevered skull.

I am sorry I should have been more specific....can you point out what Carter did...and by that I mean actually name something, not just say he abandoned and betray. Mindless words that have no basis in fact, and are just your Opinions. I am sure you most likely Gush that Reagan beat the USSR...but you never bother to look at who Started the Funding in Afghanistan and US backing, that was the thing that killed it...thats right, started under Carter.

Also yes "poorly Trained" If the Delta Force is Poorly Trained, then I guess the rest of our Military must have been peasants with rocks. But I am sure in your mind the President of the US goes down draws up the plans, trains the troops, shows them how to shoot, flies over Iran to check out weather conditions and to find out about Sand Plooms, that can knock out choppers....all himself. No the tells the Military get me a plan to get in and get them out, then they do, and he OK's it.

And yes, Iran Contra, Ronny Had No clue about it, it was all Oliver North ( who Republicans still get wet dreams over still for some reason) I guess you go on theory he was 1, so out of his mind he did not know what was going on anymore. or 2, that he had no clue what his own Military and Policy people where doing in regards to everything due to poor leadership?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

You deniers seem to like to use meaningless political terms like "appeasers" Well, if you must, but it adds nothing to the discussion.

Read my posts. I've never advocated leaving Iraq to the terrorists.





In whose alternate reality has Al Qaeda Iraq been "crushed"? Must be another dimension.

Based on US Military Reports, its at its lowest power since just after the war. That said it was at Zero before the war, and still is a major force , and far from " Crushed"