John Edwards endorses Obama

[Cosworth]

OH yea, one more thing. You are aware that Israel and Syria have announced that they will sit down together to talk right? Those silly Israel's. Don't they know you can't talk to terrorist. Tsk Tsk Tsk.

 

[EastUS]

OH yea, one more thing. You are aware that Israel and Syria have announced that they will sit down together to talk right? Those silly Israel's. Don't they know you can't talk to terrorist. Tsk Tsk Tsk.

I've not ever noted ANY personal opposition towards diplomatic efforts, so where you get three postings worth of BS implying otherwise, is evidently due to your own preconceptions, and personal agenda.....If you've read my postings..you've seen ""So why not talk to them?" I've no problem with our doing that. I have little hopes of that proving out as anything productive though." I simply have little optimism for any great successes with that approach when dealing with extremist regimes. Conflict should ALWAYS be avoided whenever rationally possible to do so and killing people should be a last resort. But..umm...err...what's the/your backup position if talks fail miserably?...Let me guess = more "diplomacy"?..and/or just pretend that everything's just beautiful-in-it's-own-way, because we all had this wonderful little discussion session?....umm..isn't the definition of insanity repeating the same experiment, and expecting different results? 🙄 Exactly WHAT do you honestly think that the Israeli backup position for their diplomatic effort is?..and do you feel that those they're talking with fully understand it? My guess is that you honestly do know..and those they're talking with certainly know from experience......

"Maybe you should check the US history books to see how we uphold treaties we don't like" I'm well aware of such..and that merely adds to my distrust of any fantasies that "Diplomacy" is the answer to all ills everywhere. Ah..so even the US breaks treaties...how utterly shocking! I assume that your statement would then reasonably imply that the maniacs running Iran and Syria should be accorded a much higher level of trust than our own government???..especially where our interests are concerned? Ok...words just fail me there.


Btw: After any/all diplomacy...umm...What's Obama's actual "backup position"..if ANY? = Challenge them to a bowling match?

 

[Tug McGroin]

Another reason that talking to them might work.

James Baker Oct 6, 2006

I know, Baker is one of those naive little kids right?

Refer to Obama’s official website at this address http://www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/ and read Diplomacy with Iran.

Diplomacy: Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress.

Obama's openness to meet with Amadinejad without preconditions has given way to equivocation. Obama has now indicated that he would not set “preconditionsâ€￾ but would have “preparationsâ€￾. The precise difference between “preconditionsâ€￾ and “preparationsâ€￾ has not been spelled out. As this issue is not going away, Obama will have to define “preparationsâ€￾. Obama’s assertion of “direct presidential diplomacyâ€￾ has given way to “low-level talksâ€￾ that would precede any summit.

Obama recently reiterated that his outreach to enemies does not include terrorists and that he would not negotiate with groups such as Hamas until they renounce terrorism and recognize Israel's right to exist.

Amadinejad has repeatedly threatens to destroy Israel and recently call Israel a “stinking corpseâ€￾. Just today Obama reiterated to Jews in Florida Israeli’s right to exist. So Obama, whats it going to be?


Cosworth, Exactly how doesn’t Obama’s foreign policy differ from the current policy of the US? Where’s that “changeâ€￾ Obama keeps talking about?

 

[EastUS]

Where’s that “changeâ€￾ Obama keeps talking about?

That's easy = Obama, (holding up sign on sidewalk): "Hey Taxpayers..you got any more spare "change"?

 

[Cosworth]

Cosworth, Exactly how doesn’t Obama’s foreign policy differ from the current policy of the US? Where’s that “changeâ€￾ Obama keeps talking about?


[/size][/font]

You mean aside from intending to with draw the troops and ending the cluster phuck in Iraq instead of dumping more troops and money into the region? Not a bit of difference.

 

[EastUS]

Not a bit of difference.

No need to fret any longer..the solution is at hand


http://www.theonion.com/content/news/obama...ain_join_forces

 

[777 fixer]

It would appear that we are well on our way toward having the first black president of the USA. I always knew it would happen but I must admit I thought it would take at least 4 or 5 more election cycles for it to happen. I figured this nation was still too racist. I thought the bigots from the 60's would have to die off first. I guess this country is a little more advanced that I thought. A pleasant surprise.


NPR Story

Having preconceived notions on the attitudes of other people, can't help but see the irony in that. 😉

 

[Cosworth]

I f watching the news and observing how race plays a part in so many different stories then fine, cll me a racists. I could care less.

To look at this country and think that racism is merely a foot note in history and that we have moved beyond it is fantasy i my opinion. This country has come a long way since the days of slavery and Jim Crow but we still have quite a way to go.

 

[777 fixer]

I f watching the news and observing how race plays a part in so many different stories then fine, cll me a racists. I could care less.

To look at this country and think that racism is merely a foot note in history and that we have moved beyond it is fantasy i my opinion. This country has come a long way since the days of slavery and Jim Crow but we still have quite a way to go.

Wow, someone is taking themselves a bit to seriously.

 

[Cosworth]

You accused me of being racist, do you think I will not try and defend my position?

 

[delldude]

Another reason that talking to them might work.

James Baker Oct 6, 2006

I know, Baker is one of those naive little kids right?

Thats all well and fine but when they talk and consistently :mf_boff: ,what say you then?
We talk with N Korea and they silently supply Syria with weapons to eliminate Israel.
We talk and trade with our 'friend' China and their little fingers show up in all kinds of pies globally.All the while like fools,we give them the rope which they will hang our heads.
Tell me of the peace treaty with Japan on 12-7-1941.
Tell me of the peace treaties Germany had with Europe....

Talk is cheap....Most of the time.

"Talking" to Iran (for over a year) didn't convince those kind and noble folk to release the Americans they'd, illegally and treacherously, taken prisoner/hostage under Jimmy Carter though, and pretty much the same wonderful people are in charge over there now.

Ron Reagan talked to them and things changed 1-20-1981....why was that?

From Wikipedia:

However, special ops personnel involved in the preparations for the second rescue attempt believed that incoming President Ronald Reagan was involved in the planning and timing of the second rescue attempt, and that these intentions were either implied or made known to the de facto Iranian government, leading to the hostages' release just minutes after Reagan's inauguration. This was reinforced by the fact that the personnel involved were on alert status, ready to go at a moment's notice, in the days leading up to the inauguration, and that the required equipment was already packed up and waiting to be shipped. Thus, a perceived and possibly communicated threat of invasion could also have influenced the timing of the hostage release.

 

[777 fixer]

You accused me of being racist, do you think I will not try and defend my position?

Now where exactly did I say "You're a racist"? I do know one thing, you're a bit to sensitive for this message board. 🙂

 

[Veritas]

From Wikipedia:

However, special ops personnel involved in the preparations for the second rescue attempt believed that incoming President Ronald Reagan was involved in the planning and timing of the second rescue attempt, and that these intentions were either implied or made known to the de facto Iranian government, leading to the hostages' release just minutes after Reagan's inauguration. This was reinforced by the fact that the personnel involved were on alert status, ready to go at a moment's notice, in the days leading up to the inauguration, and that the required equipment was already packed up and waiting to be shipped. Thus, a perceived and possibly communicated threat of invasion could also have influenced the timing of the hostage release.

Hmmm...

The point is (and it just flew over your head) why would someone with such outstanding credentials as yourself stoop to using such a bogus source as Wikipedia to belittle and assassinate people with opposing views?

Not a credible source

Not a credible source.

 

[delldude]

Hmmm...

He he he...I knew you'd bite

You're too predictable..... 🙄

Using Wikipedia as a research tool

Main articles: Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia

As a wiki, articles are never complete. They are continually edited and improved over time, and in general this results in an upward trend of quality, and a growing consensus over a fair and balanced representation of information.

Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start, and may contain false or debatable information. Indeed, many articles start their lives as partisan, and after a long process of discussion, debate and argument, they gradually take on a neutral point of view reached through consensus. Others may for a while become caught up in a heavily unbalanced viewpoint which can take some time — months perhaps — to achieve better balanced coverage of their subject. In part, this is because editors often contribute content in which they have a particular interest and do not attempt to make each article that they edit comprehensive. However, eventually additional editors expand and contribute to articles and strive to achieve balance and comprehensive coverage. In addition, Wikipedia operates a number of internal resolution processes that can assist when editors disagree on content and approach, and eventually the editors generally reach a consensus on ways to improve the article.

 

[Veritas]

You're too predictable..... 🙄

Not nearly as much as you are. 😛