Bruce;
oSFSUbMWenU
or
e3Oj7Jn9rv4
You’re welcome. |
| |
Written By:
Bithead
URL:
http://bitsblog.florack.us
|
|
Bithead: Your ideas are intriguing. Could I buy something from you? |
| |
Written By:
Bryan Pick
URL:
http://www.qando.net
|
|
I’m willing to give him a pass on this. He presumably realized that "no preconditions" is not only a poor political position but also pretty boneheaded. Like any politician, he’s lying his way out of the corner he painted himself into. |
| |
Written By:
docjim505
URL:
http://
|
|
im curious as per my knowledge pakistan was never a failed state like mccain suggested. however the general did take power in a coup. |
| |
Written By:
slntax
URL:
http://
|
Bryan;
Those are Youtube file names to look at.
I posted a vid from there raising the exact points that Bruce had, without knowing it, as sometimes happens,a nd then 10 minutes later, the vid was gone.
I found a couple other files on YOutube, slightly different edits of the same event posted them at my place.
Later in my rounds I found Bruce had posted the same vid.. and thought the others I found might be of some use to Bruce.
Hope it helps.
|
| |
Written By:
Bithead
URL:
http://bitsblog.florack.us
|
Oh, I see.
... you should have tried to sell me something. I was putty in your hands, putty with money. |
| |
Written By:
Bryan Pick
URL:
http://www.qando.net
|
You decide who is telling the truth here. Yeah. Obama or Obama. |
| |
Written By:
Ronnie Gipper
URL:
http://
|
.. you should have tried to sell me something. I was putty in your hands, putty with money.
Well, see, that’s always been a problem. Sales has never been my forte’...
|
| |
Written By:
Bithead
URL:
http://bitsblog.florack.us
|
Obama: I’m glad the Senator McCain brought up the bipartisan history of us engaging in direct diplomacy. Senator McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger who is one of his advisors who along with 5 Secretaries of State just said that we should meet with Iran; Guess what? He said without preconditions. This is one of your own advisers...
McCain: Look. Dr. Kissinger did not say that he would approve a face to face meeting between the President of the United States and Ahmadinejad. he did not say that. He said there could be lower level meetings. I’ve always encouraged them. The Iranians have met with Ambassador Crocker in Baghdad. What senator Obama doesn’t understand is that without precondition you sit down with someone who has called Israel a stinking corpse and wants to destroy that country and wipe it off the map, you legitimize those comments. This is dangerous. This isn’t just naive... By the way, Dr. Kissinger who has been my friend for 35 years would be interested to hear Senator Obama’s depiction on the issue. I’ve known him for 35 years
Obama: (interrupting) Lets take a look. ... yeah .. let’s take a look ...KISSINGER: 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...
(CROSSTALK)
SESNO: Put at a very high level right out of the box?
KISSINGER: Initially, yes. And I always believed that the best way to begin a negotiation is to tell the other side exactly what you have in mind and what you are — what the outcome is that you’re trying to achieve so that they have something that they can react to. Last time I checked, the President was not Secretary Of State. |
| |
Written By:
Neo
URL:
http://
|
Neo,
Let’s not let facts get in the way of anything here. If facts were important, Obama and his flock would actually have to remember what they said in stead of making it up each day.
|
| |
Written By:
Barrett
URL:
http://
|
Last time I checked, the President was not Secretary Of State. Oh yeah? Well Obama is gonna be both. Come November 5th, he’ll be in charge of all 58 states!
;)
Now what was it the left was saying about ’Chimpy McBush’ being stupid ...? |
| |
Written By:
Ronnie Gipper
URL:
http://
|
Bithead -
The second video (e3Oj7Jn9rv4) elucidates Obama’s answer by giving us Hillary’s response to the same question. Quite a contrast. Quite a stark, day vs. night, contrast.
I must be losing my mind. I would rather have another President Clinton than a President Obama. Okay universe! You win! |
| |
Written By:
Ronnie Gipper
URL:
http://
|
The simplest reason why we should demand preconditions for meeting with such rogue states is that if you do not then their positions then become negotiable.
For example, if you sit down with Iran without preconditions, what position are you going to negotiate away to have them recognize Israel? If you go to the table with that condition open you are letting them negotiate that illegitimate point in a legitimate manner.
If you go meet Hitler at Munich without preconditions, to get "Peace in Our Times" you simply had to give away Czechoslovakia. Appeasement is the price you pay to rogue rulers that have inflexible and outrageous demands. Negotiation for them is the opportunity to trade illegitimate demands for major, substantive concessions. Couple that with the actual credibility of the negotiators, that is, the dictators and tyrants usually "give away" points they have no intention of honoring, while the democracy usually lives up to their word. "Peace in Our Times" lasted about one year. What Britain got was not worth the petrol Neville Chamberlain used to fly to Munich. What Hitler received were concessions that completely changed the immediate strategic picture in Europe to his advantage.
THe fact that Barrack Obama has absolutley revealed he does not understand the difference between "prepraration" and "preconditions" clearly indicates that he has no business being the President of the United States. |
| |
Written By:
Mark
URL:
http://
|
|
D3eEBP vusvjepbjygh, [url=http://nrbfxiltuvir.com/]nrbfxiltuvir[/url], [link=http://itnnoyqthuva.com/]itnnoyqthuva[/link], http://mvlggvyknkqj.com/ |
| |
Written By:
uhsygsp
URL:
http://gzekijhlnghh.com/
|
Hey Neo,
Nice job of editing Kissinger’s comments. You used the first few sentences of one of his responses, but left out the money quote. Here we go:
KISSINGER: "Initially, yes. And I always believed that the best way to begin a negotiation is to tell the other side exactly what you have in mind and what you are — what the outcome is that you’re trying to achieve so that they have something that they can react to."
the rest of the response, you craftily snipped — here it is"Now, the permanent members of the Security Council, plus Japan and Germany, have all said nuclear weapons in Iran are unacceptable. They’ve never explained what they mean by this. So if we go into a negotiation, we ought to have a clear understanding of what is it we’re trying to prevent. What is it going to do if we can’t achieve what we’re talking about?"
But I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations. We ought, however, to be very clear about the content of negotiations and work it out with other countries and with our own government."
(bold emphasis mine)
source: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0809/20/se.01.html
If you still believe that Kissinger did not clearly state his support of foregoing preconditions before negotiating, I’d love to hear your tortured logic. |
| |
Written By:
JC
URL:
http://
|
