U.S., Iran hold first formal talks in 27 years

[OzmO]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/28/iran.us.talks/index.html


I wonder if there are any on the GETbig board who think this isn't a good thing?

It may be all BS but it is useful for now and in the future in address the arming of insurgents.

[GroinkTropin]

Iran simply wants to be a player like us and china, they got their attention and now will try and assert themselves globally. I don't for one second think they will attack isreal or launch missles at us, no matter what they say.

[OzmO]

Iran simply wants to be a player like us and china, they got their attention and now will try and assert themselves globally. I don't for one second think they will attack isreal or launch missles at us, no matter what they say.

I agree.  Absolutely.   They want to be a player.  And they will be.   

[tu_holmes]

The reality is that they want their standard of life raised like everyone else in the world.

You could also possibly take this as a sign that as much chest thumping as they did about their "nuclear" capabilities, that perhaps they are not as close to nuclear as they would have had the world  believe.

[Laughing Sam's Dice]

I agree.  Absolutely.   They want to be a player.  And they will be.   

Why shouldn't they be.  It's their part of the world.

BTW- the U.S. generally supports repressive conservative religious government's because those countries keep their people repressed- afraid to fight for democratic socialism.

[OzmO]

Why shouldn't they be.  It's their part of the world.

BTW- the U.S. generally supports repressive conservative religious government's because those countries keep their people repressed- afraid to fight for democratic socialism.

I agree with you until I hear the rhetoric of Iran's leadership.   But, that's moot.  Becuase whether we like it or not, they will be a nuclear power unless we declare war, start a draft and invade them.

[Hedgehog]

There is a change in the leadership of Iran.

Ahmadinejad is losing his base of power, and Rafsanjani, a more pragmatic man, is gaining ground, is second only to Khamenei.

-Hedge

[Camel Jockey]

Betcha it has something to do with oil.

[headhuntersix]

Hedge has hit it....the mullahs are sick of his crap.

[OzmO]

There is a change in the leadership of Iran.

Ahmadinejad is losing his base of power, and Rafsanjani, a more pragmatic man, is gaining ground, is second only to Khamenei.

-Hedge

I'm glad of it.  Maybe that's why talks are taking place to begin with.

[ribonucleic]

I wonder if there are any on the GETbig board who think this isn't a good thing?

It has been so long since the Bush administration did anything that wasn't despicable on its face, I'm not sure how to react to this.

To whatever extent (completely unknown) it will make it more difficult for the neo-fascists to bomb Iran, it's a good thing.

To whatever extent (also unknown) it might ameliorate the hell-on-earth we, to our perpetual disgrace, have unleashed in Iraq, it's a good thing.

But maybe I'm just in a cheerful mood knowing that Bush had to spend his day acting solemn for the cameras rather than doing something he enjoys. 

[Dos Equis]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/28/iran.us.talks/index.html


I wonder if there are any on the GETbig board who think this isn't a good thing?

It may be all BS but it is useful for now and in the future in address the arming of insurgents.

Call me a cynic.     I say first item on the agenda should be Iran supplying insurgents. 

[OzmO]

Call me a cynic.     I say first item on the agenda should be Iran supplying insurgents. 

that's kind of what they are doing isn't it?  Even then, for Iran to admit it is a bad political move as well as America directly accusing them of it.  To save face, they deal with it under a guise. 

[Laughing Sam's Dice]

Call me a cynic.     I say first item on the agenda should be Iran supplying insurgents. 

There are no insurgents in Iran, because there is no legitimate government- just the puppet U.S. government.