On Sitting Down With Iran & Syria Over Iraq

[maineman]

I disagree with your opinion that Syria is a puppet of Iran. Baathists throughout the middle east would spit out their arabic coffee if they read that.

 

[Gurdari]

So when the terrorists attacked the WTC the first time, US Marines in Yemen, Khobar Towers, embassies bombed in Kenya and Tanzania, and the USS Cole we need to sit down with the bastaards are find out what we did to piss them off?

Or when they bomb open air markets, pizza shops, schools, police stations, and other vital military targets - we need to find out what caused them to snap?

No we kill the bastards. End of problem

So, when the US bombs, etc is that a crime? Or do the rules no longer apply?
And why not consider motive when a killing takes place? Don't judges do that in America?

 

[red states rule]

So, when the US bombs, etc is that a crime? Or do the rules no longer apply?
And why not consider motive when a killing takes place? Don't judges do that in America?

When the terroists bastards attack America - it is an act of war

Libs treat it like a criminal act

 

[Gurdari]

When the terroists bastards attack America - it is an act of war

Libs treat it like a criminal act

So... one standard for all, or a double standard for some?
IS terrorism defined by the act, or by who commits it?

 

[Gurdari]

A "lesson" the Muslims need to look at a little closer.

Don't those living in refugee camps or those who flee airstikes get a close look?
And which is it?
America tries everything before resorting to violence, or
America has every right to attack whomever it pleases?

Or is the lesson, "the law applies to you - not us".

 

[Bullypulpit]

Gosh, ya know, including Iran and Syria at the table regarding Iraq and the region was what the grown ups in the Iraq Study Group recommended in December. Instead of doing so, especially when Iran offered to sit down and negotiate with the Administration in 2003, Chimpy and Co continued to practice their "Paris Hilton School of School of Diplomacy" tactics. This largely consisted of "I don't like you, so I'm not going to talk to you." But that's been the policy of Chimpy and Co since day one...If they don't like what they hear, it just gets ignored. It's been their policy in every aspect of government from domestic policy to foreign policy.

Of course, when you only listen to what you want to hear, reality gets short shrift. And that's a hallmark of the Bush administration...disconnected from reality.

 

[Annie]

Gosh, ya know, including Iran and Syria at the table regarding Iraq and the region was what the grown ups in the Iraq Study Group recommended in December. Instead of doing so, especially when Iran offered to sit down and negotiate with the Administration in 2003, Chimpy and Co continued to practice their "Paris Hilton School of School of Diplomacy" tactics. This largely consisted of "I don't like you, so I'm not going to talk to you." But that's been the policy of Chimpy and Co since day one...If they don't like what they hear, it just gets ignored. It's been their policy in every aspect of government from domestic policy to foreign policy.

Of course, when you only listen to what you want to hear, reality gets short shrift. And that's a hallmark of the Bush administration...disconnected from reality.

Actually it seems to me that it would be like sitting down with Germany in WWII to ask how we might pacify Japan or vice versa. We were talking to Iran when the took over the embassy under Carter. Both countries have done all they can to create chaos in Iraq, you believe talking is going to make them change their behavior? Behavior that has been occuring for their own purposes?

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/16816362.htm

A major flaw in new U.S. diplomacy
The nature of the rogue nations is unchanged. There is no pressure for leaders to heed pledges.


Claudia Rosett

is a journalist-in-residence

at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies

It would be wonderful to feel warm and happy about the diplomacy now breaking out all over. Five years ago America was confronting the axis of evil. Today we are offering access to envoys. After years in the cold, North Korea's Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye Gwan is on his way to New York for talks involving U.S. promises of aid and diplomatic normalization if Pyongyang just stops making nuclear bombs.

Later this month, at a "neighbors" conference convened by Iraq, America plans to sit down with Syria and Iran, whose leaders, in the grand tradition of Tony Soprano, are sending delegates to ponder ways of "stabilizing" the region they have been destabilizing with terrorist networks and bombs.

From global superpower and world cop, America is now recasting itself as feel-good therapist for rogue regimes - seeking to know what's really on the mind of Kim Jong Il, and ready to break bread with the ayatollahs. It all sounds so civilized.

But I am more worried now than I have been since that clarifying and awful morning of Sept. 11, 2001. While America's policy may be shifting, the nature of our enemies has not. We are now seeking good-faith deals with governments that rule by terror, and lie and cheat with an impunity that our own leaders cannot afford.

Diplomacy has its own impetus toward promises, treaties and frameworks that depend on good faith from both sides. America, when making a pledge, is under tremendous pressure - by the very nature of our democratic system of transparency and law - to keep it. A Dear Leader Kim Jong Il, or a President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Bashar al-Assad, is not.

North Korea cheated on its 1994 nuclear freeze deal not only according to U.S. diplomats, but by its own belligerent admission. Syria and Iran have escaped any direct redress for the terror they have bred in Iraq and Lebanon - while tut-tutting about the turmoil. Instead, time goes by while politicians in Washington study and debate and discuss whether or not the lying we have seen already is serious, and the cheating is real, and whether yet another feckless resolution from a United Nations Security Council fundamentally divided between democratic and dictatorial systems of government might somehow bring harmony.

Having dismissed military options, America is preparing to bargain away even the financial leverage we might wield. This is a talk-talk phase of what these tyrants have already effectively declared as war-war.

...

 

[Bullypulpit]

Actually it seems to me that it would be like sitting down with Germany in WWII to ask how we might pacify Japan or vice versa. We were talking to Iran when the took over the embassy under Carter. Both countries have done all they can to create chaos in Iraq, you believe talking is going to make them change their behavior? Behavior that has been occuring for their own purposes?

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/16816362.htm

That's a really BAD analogy. There is no comparison between the W.W. II Axis powers and Chimpy's "Axis of Evil". The former was a real threat to the world...the latter is merely a rhetorical device.

But say what you will, dear lady, that is how I will always think of you...A dear lady.

 

[Annie]

That's a really BAD analogy. There is no comparison between the W.W. II Axis powers and Chimpy's "Axis of Evil". The former was a real threat to the world...the latter is merely a rhetorical device.

But say what you will, dear lady, that is how I will always think of you...A dear lady.

I suppose that depends on what occurs in the future, as far as the analogy goes. As for the later, thanks, the compliment is returned.

 

[Bullypulpit]

A discusion with most libs lasts only fpr about three or four posts. Then they fall back on the same old same old - personal insults and crude remarks

However, I will admit, it is getting easier to get the libs to meltdown

Judging from some of your recent remarks elsewhere, you' re the one who resorts to ad hominem attacks and puerile name-calling. As for melting down, old son, you simply wilt.

 

[ekrem]

From German Newspaper
Frankfurter Allgmeine Zeitung:

Foreign Minister Rice asked the Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs Gül, who visited from 5th to 9th February the United States, which chances he sees for a conference for an broad Iraq conference. Gül submitted a plan, which Mrs. Rice followed. First around the 11th March meeting on Ambassador level of the neighbours of Iraq and the G-8-States in Bagdad, then one conference on Foreign Affairs MInister level in April in Istanbul.
In the past week Gül had convinced the Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mottaki, who visited Ankara, of a participation. This weekend Gül traveled as an observer to the Arab league Foreign Affairs meeting to Cairo. Discretely Turkey took the affair into the hand and managed that those, who went themselves so far out of the way, now to sit themselves to a table.
Turkey wants to keep alive on the one hand the regular consultations of the neighbours of Iraq. Turkey sees this as an effective mean to contain the civil war in Iraq. With the neighbours Iran and Syria Turkey shares furthermore the interest to prevent the establishment of a Kurdish state in north Iraq. Beyond the neighbouring states and UN Securiry Members Turkey wants to merge Germany in this process Turkish diplomats say.

http://www.faz.net/s/Rub28FC768942F...848A3AA1DA5126FCEF~ATpl~Ecommon~Scontent.html