Kissinger Did Say Meet Without Pre Conditions

[Silence]

Obama lied? or did Obama take what Kissinger said about meeting without pre-conditions and apply it to Iran? If that's a lie then McCain is the biggest fucking liar in this race.

Did anyone expect Kissinger to come out and support Obama against his friend McCain? GMAB!

 

[Shadow]

That was only after McCain said point black 'my good friend kissinger will aggree with me'. What did you expect him to do?

Kissinger's original opinion Obama mis quoted said "high level" talks not "Presidential level" talks. but keep spinning away....it's all you have.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

Obama lied? or did Obama take what Kissinger said about meeting without pre-conditions and apply it to Iran? If that's a lie then McCain is the biggest fucking liar in this race.

Did anyone expect Kissinger to come out and support Obama against his friend McCain? GMAB!

I expect rational people to recognize that Obama can't or won't tell the truth to get elected.

Relax though, we have low expectations for your kind.

 

[DiveCon]

Obama lied? or did Obama take what Kissinger said about meeting without pre-conditions and apply it to Iran? If that's a lie then McCain is the biggest fucking liar in this race.

Did anyone expect Kissinger to come out and support Obama against his friend McCain? GMAB!

because Kissinger DIDNT say what Obama claimed

 

[del]

That was only after McCain said point black 'my good friend kissinger will aggree with me'. What did you expect him to do?

i give up. what the fuck is "point black"?

 

[Silence]

Kissinger's original opinion Obama mis quoted said "high level" talks not "Presidential level" talks. but keep spinning away....it's all you have.

and in the debate Obama never said presidential level either... McCain put those words in his mouth...

what is the problem with Obama being willing to meet with Iran and discuss what needs to happen to secure the safety of this country?

Has not meeting with leaders done us any good?

 

[DiveCon]

and in the debate Obama never said presidential level either... McCain put those words in his mouth...

what is the problem with Obama being willing to meet with Iran and discuss what needs to happen to secure the safety of this country?

Has not meeting with leaders done us any good?

come on, be intelectually honest, that is the premise Obama has claimed

 

[del]

and in the debate Obama never said presidential level either... McCain put those words in his mouth...

what is the problem with Obama being willing to meet with Iran and discuss what needs to happen to secure the safety of this country?

Has not meeting with leaders done us any good?

well, unless he's running for SecState, presidential level is kind of assumed. maybe he's decided to flip with Biden; O seems to spend all his time running against Palin anyway.

 

[Shogun]

For real.. it's fucking HILARIOUS that Mccain had to add the "presidents" qualifier in order to run around this easily provable quote...


talk about taking an uppercut to the chin.

 

[DiamondDave]

The truth is that McCain voted with George Bush 90% of the time.

Now we have rising unemployment, rising gas prices, record foreclosures, record trade deficit, the Big Three on the verge of bankrupcy, $700 billion dollars wasted on Iraq, a $500 billion dollar budget deficit, and a stock market crash.

McCain is a lying idiot. We need a new direction.

Wow.. the liberal slogan bot posting the same shit over and over and over and over again

 

[sealybobo]

He didn'ts specify who would meet, or at what level, but he used the words "without preconditions."

In my opinion, Kissinger should be in jail for mass murder right now. He can't fly into some European countries because he would be arrested.

The fat little bastard who put "real politic" over human life.

Yes, they called him and he lied to defend McCain when he said he never said what Obama said.

I hate seeing guys like him and Newt and Rove on tv. When Abramoff gets out, I'm sure he'll be a GOP celebrity.

 

[AllieBaba]

Kissinger has come out and point-blank said Obama is wrong and McCain is right.

How do you retards operate with a straight face by putting words into people's mouths?

Because it's not about what people say...it's about what they THINK..and libtards can read people's minds.

 

[Shogun]

You can read Kissingers quote. Obama didn't say a damn thing about "PRESIDENTIAL LEVEL" contact... But Kissinger DID say that we need contact with Iran. They are available all day long. go to any factcheck site. The act of Kissinger sucking Mccain's dick after the fact does not make his quote any less accurate in the context that Obama stated. If you can find where Obama said anything about a PRESIDENTIAL LEVEL there might not be as much egg on Mccain's scrambling face.

 

[del]

You can read Kissingers quote. Obama didn't say a damn thing about "PRESIDENTIAL LEVEL" contact... But Kissinger DID say that we need contact with Iran.

"Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions."

Barack Obama and Joe Biden: The Change We Need | Foreign Policy

really? sure looks to me like he did.

 

[sealybobo]

Kissinger has come out and point-blank said Obama is wrong and McCain is right.

How do you retards operate with a straight face by putting words into people's mouths?

Just look at John McCain to figure that one out bucko. He said the fundamentals of our economy are strong.

When he finally got called on his bullshit, he said he was talking about the people. Yea, that's the ticket, yea. The people!

John Lovits "the liar" from SNL, remember him?

So Kissinger is a McCain boy. He is not above lying. He's a good old boy. Has been since Nixon. Are we expected to forget that?

So fuck Kissinger.

 

[Shogun]

"Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions."

Barack Obama and Joe Biden: The Change We Need | Foreign Policy

really? sure looks to me like he did.

in regards to KISSINGER'S QUOTE? You know.. what was being DEBATED at the DEBATE? WOW. You silly little people just don't stop trying to slide around, do you?


Did Kissinger Back Obama?

McCain attacked Obama for his declaration that he would meet with leaders of Iran and other hostile nations "without preconditions." To do so with Iran, McCain said, "isn't just naive; it's dangerous." Obama countered by saying former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger – a McCain adviser – agreed with him:


Obama: Senator McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who's one of his advisers, who, along with five recent secretaries of state, just said that we should meet with Iran – guess what – without precondition. This is one of your own advisers.

McCain rejected Obama's claim:

McCain: By the way, my friend, Dr. Kissinger, who's been my friend for 35 years, would be interested to hear this conversation and Senator Obama's depiction of his -- of his positions on the issue. I've known him for 35 years.
Obama: We will take a look.
McCain: And I guarantee you he would not -- he would not say that presidential top level.
Obama: Nobody's talking about that.

So who's right? Kissinger did in fact say a few days earlier at a forum of former secretaries of state that he favors very high-level talks with Iran – without conditions:

Kissinger Sept. 20: Well, I am in favor of negotiating with Iran. And one utility of negotiation is to put before Iran our vision of a Middle East, of a stable Middle East, and our notion on nuclear proliferation at a high enough level so that they have to study it. And, therefore, I actually have preferred doing it at the secretary of state level so that we -- we know we're dealing with authentic...

CNN's Frank Sesno: Put at a very high level right out of the box?

Kissinger: Initially, yes.But I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations.


FactCheck.org: FactChecking Debate No. 1

 

[del]

in regards to KISSINGER'S QUOTE? You know.. what was being DEBATED at the DEBATE? WOW. You silly little people just don't stop trying to slide around, do you?


Did Kissinger Back Obama?

McCain attacked Obama for his declaration that he would meet with leaders of Iran and other hostile nations "without preconditions." To do so with Iran, McCain said, "isn't just naive; it's dangerous." Obama countered by saying former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger – a McCain adviser – agreed with him:


Obama: Senator McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who's one of his advisers, who, along with five recent secretaries of state, just said that we should meet with Iran – guess what – without precondition. This is one of your own advisers.

McCain rejected Obama's claim:

McCain: By the way, my friend, Dr. Kissinger, who's been my friend for 35 years, would be interested to hear this conversation and Senator Obama's depiction of his -- of his positions on the issue. I've known him for 35 years.
Obama: We will take a look.
McCain: And I guarantee you he would not -- he would not say that presidential top level.
Obama: Nobody's talking about that.

So who's right? Kissinger did in fact say a few days earlier at a forum of former secretaries of state that he favors very high-level talks with Iran – without conditions:

Kissinger Sept. 20: Well, I am in favor of negotiating with Iran. And one utility of negotiation is to put before Iran our vision of a Middle East, of a stable Middle East, and our notion on nuclear proliferation at a high enough level so that they have to study it. And, therefore, I actually have preferred doing it at the secretary of state level so that we -- we know we're dealing with authentic...

CNN's Frank Sesno: Put at a very high level right out of the box?

Kissinger: Initially, yes.But I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations.


FactCheck.org: FactChecking Debate No. 1

oh, i'm sorry. you're referring only to the debate, not his initially stated position that i pulled from his web page. well, i guess it does get tough to keep up with the shifting sands of his position. maybe you could drop him a note and tell him to update his web page to reflect his new position? i'm sure he'd be most appreciative.

 

[frazzledgear]

He didn'ts specify who would meet, or at what level, but he used the words "without preconditions."

In my opinion, Kissinger should be in jail for mass murder right now. He can't fly into some European countries because he would be arrested.

The fat little bastard who put "real politic" over human life.

He specifically said he was talking about low level discussions. Not a face-to-face meeting between the President and Ahmedinajad.

For those who think the President should talk face-to-face with this Islamofascist, do you really expect anything more beneficial to come of it than Chamberlain got by sitting down with Hitler? And then came out to announce he had achieved "peace in our time"? Once you agree to a top level face-to-face meeting without preconditions, it is only OUR SIDE that can give up something in order to try and appease the other. Ahmedinejad has zero interest in trying to appease us -never has. Whether the US is happy or not about what his country is doing isn't even on their list of priorities here.

All that is possible to achieve with no preconditions is an appeasement agreement that does nothing to deter the aggressor from what he was doing all along, who will only forfeit whatever carrot was being held out in the first place if he continues on -but never had when he already going about working towards his goals anyway. So he "forfeits" something he never had while doing it before and still doesn't have it. Big deal. Except he was able to stall for the precious time HE needed the most and the best part for him -he may also end up getting some of what he wanted that will help him achieve their longterm plan of aggression -but without having to expend his side's blood and treasure to get it.

Hitler got the Sudetenland - for merely sitting down with Chamberlain. Didn't cost him a single weapon or a single soldier to get it. For merely PROMISING to abandon his goals of aggression -a promise he never intended to keep anyway. That appeasement agreement not only did not deter him from going and taking the rest of what he wanted all along -it emboldened him to do so. BECAUSE of that meeting Hitler specifically said he was convinced the world did not have the stomach to stop him when he went ahead and took the rest. And would do nothing more effective than publicly squeal. He was partially right -they took their damn time about finally doing something about it and because of that, it nearly cost them the victory.

And the dolts who refuse to learn the mistakes of history want Appeasement Part Deux -once again totally convinced that a historically proven failed policy will surely work if given just one more chance. A face-to-face meeting between the President and Ahmedinejad will only benefit one side. And it sure wouldn't be to the benefit of the rest of the world.

Before any such meeting can take place -one WITH preconditions - the US must first MAKE Iran care whether the US is happy about they are doing and realize the US being unhappy is costing it the ability to even function on a normal level and is driving their government towards collapse, risking an uprising of their own population and/or the total bankruptcy of their country (which also means they can never get further towards their goals of aggression anyway under such conditions) -unless the US is the one appeased. Not Iran. And that hasn't happened or gotten anywhere close to happening.

 

[Shogun]

oh, i'm sorry. you're referring only to the debate, not his initially stated position that i pulled from his web page. well, i guess it does get tough to keep up with the shifting sands of his position. maybe you could drop him a note and tell him to update his web page to reflect his new position? i'm sure he'd be most appreciative.

poor guy... does that skinned knee sting? myawww... quotes are like that mean asphalt that gave you a booboo, aren't they?

 

[Shogun]

He specifically said he was talking about low level discussions. Not a face-to-face meeting between the President and Ahmedinajad.

For those who think the President should talk face-to-face with this Islamofascist, do you really expect anything more beneficial to come of it than Chamberlain got by sitting down with Hitler? And then came out to announce he had achieved "peace in our time"? Once you agree to a top level face-to-face meeting without preconditions, it is only OUR SIDE that can give up something in order to try and appease the other. Ahmedinejad has zero interest in trying to appease us -never has. Whether the US is happy or not about what his country is doing isn't even on their list of priorities here.

All that is possible to achieve with no preconditions is an appeasement agreement that does nothing to deter the aggressor from what he was doing all along, who will only forfeit whatever carrot was being held out in the first place if he continues on -but never had when he already going about working towards his goals anyway. So he "forfeits" something he never had while doing it before and still doesn't have it. Big deal. Except he was able to stall for the precious time HE needed the most and the best part for him -he may also end up getting some of what he wanted that will help him achieve their longterm plan of aggression -but without having to expend his side's blood and treasure to get it.

Hitler got the Sudetenland - for merely sitting down with Chamberlain. Didn't cost him a single weapon or a single soldier to get it. For merely PROMISING to abandon his goals of aggression -a promise he never intended to keep anyway. That appeasement agreement not only did not deter him from going and taking the rest of what he wanted all along -it emboldened him to do so. BECAUSE of that meeting Hitler specifically said he was convinced the world did not have the stomach to stop him when he went ahead and took the rest. And would do nothing more effective than publicly squeal. He was partially right -they took their damn time about finally doing something about it and because of that, it nearly cost them the victory.

And the dolts who refuse to learn the mistakes of history want Appeasement Part Deux -once again totally convinced that a historically proven failed policy will surely work if given just one more chance. A face-to-face meeting between the President and Ahmedinejad will only benefit one side. And it sure wouldn't be to the benefit of the rest of the world.

Before any such meeting can take place -one WITH preconditions - the US must first MAKE Iran care whether the US is happy about they are doing and realize the US being unhappy is costing it the ability to even function on a normal level and is driving their government towards collapse, risking an uprising of their own population and/or the total bankruptcy of their country (which also means they can never get further towards their goals of aggression anyway under such conditions) -unless the US is the one appeased. Not Iran. And that hasn't happened or gotten anywhere close to happening.

I JUST FUCKING QUOTED KISSINGER. HE SAID HIGH LEVEL DIPLOMACY. SPECIFICALLY THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE SAKE OF LEGITIMACY.

sheesh.. you pathetic motherfuckers are STILL chaffing from quotable dialog, eh?