Obama calls for talks with Iran over Iraq

[kaydee457 13]

Well, admittedly I haven't gone back to read all the posts since last night but I'll just reiterate that it's never a good idea to reveal to your enemies your strategies beforehand.

It's as absurd as setting a timetable for retreat..........

We may need Iran's cooperation but blatantly telling them so leaves no leverage for negotiating the best deal possible.......and yes, it emboldens them.

Now there have been many in the political arena that advocate including Iran in a solution to Iraq's woes (and ours) but they're not running for president!

Edited April 9, 2008 by kaydee457

[HAL 9000 96]

Interesting. Telling them we want to avoid armed conflict by being diplomatic is somehow contrary to diplomacy, is this what's wrong according to your logic? Gee how we progress as a nation...

[Heracles 417]

Ah liberals.. I cannot put it in words but I will ask this.

Do you guys realize that country's like Iran have ideals, beliefs, views etc that are the complete opposite to that of liberal American. Therefore why the hell would they want to negotiate with you guys?? Why would they be diplomatic with a party who represents evil for them. Republicans on the other hand at least have some sort of chance. To be honest I don't know of many nations who have similar ideals to those of liberal Americans.

Edit: Keep in mind I am not saying being diplomatic is a bad thing. What I am basically asking is how does a liberal American plan on achieving this?

Edited April 9, 2008 by Boo-Yah!

[HAL 9000 96]

Ah liberals.. I cannot put it in words but I will ask this.

Do you guys realize that country's like Iran have ideals, beliefs, views etc that are the complete opposite to that of liberal American. Therefore why the hell would they want to negotiate with you guys?? Why would they be diplomatic with a party who represents evil for them. Republicans on the other hand at least have some sort of chance. To be honest I don't know of many nations who have similar ideals to those of liberal Americans.

Edit: Keep in mind I am not saying being diplomatic is a bad thing. What I am basically asking is how does a liberal American plan on achieving this?

Maybe because its their country, their backyard, and their region. Not ours. For starters. Second, its not all a country-wide phenomenon so perhaps you should clarify what it is you are trying to generalize indiscriminately.

Perhaps understanding a bit about Islamic religion and cultures you'd see that not all are out to blow themselves up when in a pickle.

Either way, its off to my liberal work.

[Heracles 417]

Maybe because its their country, their backyard, and their region. Not ours. For starters. Second, its not all a country-wide phenomenon so perhaps you should clarify what it is you are trying to generalize indiscriminately.

Perhaps understanding a bit about Islamic religion and cultures you'd see that not all are out to blow themselves up when in a pickle.

Either way, its off to my liberal work.

Why do you think people like Osama attacked the US? In their eyes the liberal American culture is polluting the world. Do you seriously not realize that? Do you think a guy who's family is worth hundreds of millions is attacking us because he is jealous of our freedoms?

I myself did not understand liberal American / conservatives etc until moving here. But once I did it is clear who these guys actually hate. For example, You guys love gays while they despise and deny them. Yet you think you are going to sit down with people who are ideologically opposite to most liberal democrats. People who are clearly willing to die for their beliefs.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Not everyone in Iran is in lock-step with the hard-liners, even if their government is run by them.

In that respect our own history with that country dating back to the 50's explains some of the distrust, not just their current ideological outlook.

[Heracles 417]

Not everyone in Iran is in lock-step with the hard-liners, even if their government is run by them.

In that respect our own history with that country dating back to the 50's explains some of the distrust, not just their current ideological outlook.

The one thing I will say that is that the US needs to stop meddling with other countries affairs. While I know they are usually doing this because they care, unfortunately this opens them up to be the scapegoat. Same thing happened to the UK for all of those years.

We cannot protect the southern border yet have military stationed across the globe protecting nations such as Japan, Italy and Germany. Three of the richest nations in the world.

Edited April 9, 2008 by Boo-Yah!

[kaydee457 13]

Interesting. Telling them we want to avoid armed conflict by being diplomatic is somehow contrary to diplomacy, is this what's wrong according to your logic? Gee how we progress as a nation...

It's not incumbent on a presidential candidate, or a president for that matter, to "tell" them anything other than what's been first vetted by the State Department. We have career people that have the diplomacy skills and credentials to engineer a diplomatic offer that's in this nation’s interest.

Obama naiveté, and inexperience, circumvents that vested intuition and replaces it with a transparent, and needy offering that does nothing but embolden the enemy.

And yes, they are the enemy of this country!

[Heracles 417]

Obama naiveté, and inexperience, circumvents that vested intuition and replaces it with a transparent, and needy offering that does nothing but embolden the enemy.

And yes, they are the enemy of this country!

I think it is a liberal thing. They think the world is like the US where we can argue with someone, call us uneducated idiots etc etc but then go back to living their NYCish hippie lives. Whereas countries like Iran would rather disappear than allow their nation to end up a San Fransisco. And would certainly refuse to negotiate with such people. Keep in mind it is human nature to group people of a country together. Same goes with our view of them. We know little about the domestic politics of Iran. So to us they are all simply Iranian.

My point is to them Americans are all the bad guys. Yet I bet if we actually sat down and spoke to them they would probably end up understanding that liberal American are not the same as conservative Americans. I am certain that Iranians not obsessed with BS issues such as marriage rights for gay oppressed poodles.

Edited April 9, 2008 by Boo-Yah!

[Heracles 417]

Now that I think of it leave the foreign policy to republicans or moderates who actually have respect overseas. What the hell would a left wing hippie child know about world affairs.

Edited April 9, 2008 by Boo-Yah!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't think anyone has any illusions over Iran. But engaging with them on an issue in which they are clearly intrinsically involved would seem a better strategy than pretending that they don't exist.

[Heracles 417]

I don't think anyone has any illusions over Iran. But engaging with them on an issue in which they are clearly intrinsically involved would seem a better strategy than pretending that they don't exist.

I agree. I just don't see it happening. Liberals can hardly communicate with conservatives in their own country yet are telling us that they will reach out to the president of a ultra fanatical Muslim nation.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

When you paint a black and white picture of Liberals and Conservatives, when in reality no such stark picture exists you can hardly be surprised when people take you to task.

In fact I'd suggest that partisanship in foreign policy is rather irrelevant.

[Heracles 417]

When you paint a black and white picture of Liberals and Conservatives, when in reality no such stark picture exists you can hardly be surprised when people take you to task.

In fact I'd suggest that partisanship in foreign policy is rather irrelevant.

It isn't a black or white picture of even generalizing. I just think a conservative is more likely to understand another conservative. An American liberal is probably the complete opposite to a Iranian conservative. Keep in mind I did say liberal and not democrat. There are still a lot of old school pre-70's hippie dems out there. The JFK types that is..

Edited April 9, 2008 by Boo-Yah!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

When you paint a black and white picture of Liberals and Conservatives, when in reality no such stark picture exists you can hardly be surprised when people take you to task.

In fact I'd suggest that partisanship in foreign policy is rather irrelevant.

It isn't a black or white picture of even generalizing. I just think a conservative is more likely to understand another conservative. An American liberal is probably the complete opposite to a Iranian conservative. Keep in mind I did say liberal and not democrat. There are still a lot of old school pre-70's hippie dems out there. The JFK types that is..

So a hawkish republican neocon is more likely to understand a hawkish iranian hardliner. Is that what you're saying?