Author Topic: A Seat at the Table  (Read 512 times)

Benny B

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 12405
  • Ron = 'Princess L' & many other gimmicks - FACT!
A Seat at the Table
« on: July 18, 2008, 07:40:19 AM »
July 18, 2008
Editorial
A Seat at the Table

We welcome the news that President Bush has decided to send one of his top diplomats to talks on Iran’s nuclear program. That is quite a change from just a few months ago when Mr. Bush denounced as appeasement any effort to talk to “terrorists and radicals.”

It is very late in the game, but we hope this means that Mr. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice are learning the lessons of seven years of failed foreign policies built almost completely on isolating (or attacking) America’s adversaries. There is little chance of solving major international problems so long as this country refuses even to have a seat at the table.

We also hope it means that Vice President Dick Cheney and his crew have given up their dangerous fantasy of bombing away Iran’s nuclear ambitions — or at least have been overruled by the president.

It has been two years since the United Nations ordered Iran to stop enriching uranium. Tehran continues to defy that order, and its scientists are getting ever closer to mastering a process that is the hardest part of building a nuclear weapon.

The United States and other major powers (Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia) have tried to use a mixture of incentives and sanctions to get Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions. But neither the rewards nor the punishments have been especially persuasive.

China and Russia, which have strong economic ties to Iran, have blocked tough sanctions, while the Bush administration has not made a credible offer of improved relations and security guarantees and had refused to sit down at the negotiating table.

Mr. Bush’s decision to send William Burns (Ms. Rice’s third in command and a well-respected former ambassador to Russia) to join the European Union’s foreign policy chief and other top diplomats in talks with Iran makes any incentives package look more credible. It also shifts the diplomatic pressure back to Tehran. And it will make it harder for Beijing and Moscow to resist imposing a new round of sanctions if Iran remains obstinate.

Washington could do even better — with the Iranian people, international opinion and possibly Iran’s leaders — if it followed up with an offer to open an interests section in Tehran.

The administration is grudgingly asserting this is a “one-time-only” deal and that Mr. Burns will not negotiate with the Iranians or hold separate meetings with them. We welcome Mr. Bush’s willingness to try diplomacy for a change. But he might do even better if he didn’t trumpet his ambivalence quite so loudly.
!

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: A Seat at the Table
« Reply #1 on: July 18, 2008, 08:08:04 AM »
London papers report we have plans for an embassy in Tehran.

Sounds like 'appeasement' is Bush's new policy ;)

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: A Seat at the Table
« Reply #2 on: July 18, 2008, 08:21:14 AM »
The guy is watching whats happening, do u want to go to war? I thought u guys all wanted peace. So Bush is pursuing peace. Makes zero difference to me. If we go to war, we get rid of a bunch of worthless human beings, if we have peace, gas comes down for awhile until the Jews have had enough.
L

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: A Seat at the Table
« Reply #3 on: July 18, 2008, 08:46:48 AM »
The guy is watching whats happening, do u want to go to war? I thought u guys all wanted peace. So Bush is pursuing peace. Makes zero difference to me. If we go to war, we get rid of a bunch of worthless human beings, if we have peace, gas comes down for awhile until the Jews have had enough.


I think negotiating with them is a great idea.

however, i'm dissing the people on getbig who spent the last year saying that talking to iran = appeasement, when in reality, you should talk to your enemies if you wish to solve the problems.

I'm waiting for all the folks who cried "Obama is an appeaser" to say the same about bush.  It's comical how quiet they are.

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24454
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: A Seat at the Table
« Reply #4 on: July 19, 2008, 04:16:58 AM »

I think negotiating with them is a great idea.

however, i'm dissing the people on getbig who spent the last year saying that talking to iran = appeasement, when in reality, you should talk to your enemies if you wish to solve the problems.

I'm waiting for all the folks who cried "Obama is an appeaser" to say the same about bush.  It's comical how quiet they are.

I'd be willing to bet there are guys chomping at the bit for Nov to come around so they can get off the bush payroll

It's got to be an absolute nightmare to have to continually pump the same BS out knowing people aren't buying it, knowing they're never gonna buy it, and stating such outrageous BS you can't even keep a straight face while typing it. I have to wonder how many computer monitors their noses have impaled while typing their hypocritical BS.  I think that come nov, some of the more vocal Obama bashers will become quieter than a mouse peeing on a cottonball.  ;D
w

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40062
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: A Seat at the Table
« Reply #5 on: November 09, 2010, 10:36:55 AM »

I think negotiating with them is a great idea.

however, i'm dissing the people on getbig who spent the last year saying that talking to iran = appeasement, when in reality, you should talk to your enemies if you wish to solve the problems.

I'm waiting for all the folks who cried "Obama is an appeaser" to say the same about bush.  It's comical how quiet they are.

240 - is obama an appeaser?