The United States Does Not Negotiate With Terrorists

[compuwiz1]

First owned by Putin, then Iran's president, Hassan Rouhani. Isn't anyone embarrassed yet?

Obama made a phone call to Rouhani, to talk about their nuclear program. Sorry folks, but Obama is not qualified to negotiate on such potentially devastating issues. Putin and Rouhani are playing us. Rouhani is more dangerous. All he's doing is buying more time, seeing the goal, when they can have a nuclear weapon, in the near future. Sure he's gonna have a "feel good" talk with Obama, as his ministers of death work toward their weapon. The best position would be that Rouhani is full of shit and you can't trust him. But, no, now he and Obozo are buds. Mr. Obama, you are dangerous, very dangerous!

Ronald Reagan would have had a very different tone for Rouhani and it would have gone something like this: "Mr. Rouhani, if you do not tear down your nuclear program by tomorrow at 5 pm, we are going to blow your country to hell".

Since when did we start negotiating with terrorist states? We have the wrong president for this. We should all be very afraid of this tool.

 

[WelshBloke]

I'm liking the way that you think Obama is unqualified to negotiate but you feel qualified to give him advice.

 

[compuwiz1]

I'm liking the way that you think Obama is unqualified to negotiate but you feel qualified to give him advice.

And I'm not liking that if Obama fucks this up we get blown away. He hasn't proven to be a good steward of this country's affairs. He's not qualified to manage the issues of other countries, especially those who want to harm us. He should leave that to the professionals.

 

[v-600]

Ronald Reagan would have had a very different tone for Rouhani and it would have gone something like this: "Mr. Rouhani, if you do not tear down your nuclear program by tomorrow at 5 pm, we are going to blow your country to hell".

Do this or we will blow your country up. I've a suggestion where you could do this war on terror. I hope you see the hypocrisy of your statement.

 

[Angry Irishman]

Like him, don't like him, it's fairly obvious that he, Obama, is looking weak to the world in terms of foreign policy.

 

[Murloc]

Iran would not be the first pariah state to have a nuke and not use it.

Also israel will just attack before they get the nuke, forcing Obama's hand, so I don't see the danger.

Threatening to blow other countries up if they threaten your world dominance isn't that ethical either.

 

[pauldun170]

Ronald Reagan would have had a very different tone for Rouhani and it would have gone something like this: "Mr. Rouhani, if you do not tear down your nuclear program by tomorrow at 5 pm, we are going to blow your country to hell".

Reagan and Iran
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Contra_affair

Reagan and Terrorists
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombing

 

[Linux23]

I don't know if you're just an idiot, or if you're a fuckin' idiot?

 

[compuwiz1]

I don't know if you're just an idiot, or if you're a fuckin' idiot?

I'm bringing forth a concern, which I feel is important. Obama scares me and I don't feel like we're in good hands on this issue.

I guess that concern warrants a typical left wing personal attack.

 

[Linux23]

I'm bringing forth a concern, which I feel is important. Obama scares me and I don't feel like we're in good hands on this issue.

I guess that concern warrants a typical left wing personal attack.

You people scare the shit out of me. Your only response is to bomb a country? Let's bomb any country that looks at us wrong. What, is the US the world's schoolyard bully?

You really need to watch http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1337137/.

 

[michal1980]

the only terrorists Obama does not negotiate with our the republicans in congress. Those guys are pure f-ing evil according to him.

 

[compuwiz1]

You people scare the shit out of me. Your only response is to bomb a country? Let's bomb any country that looks at us wrong. What, is the US the world's schoolyard bully?

You really need to watch http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1337137/.

You people? I was being facetious, only to illustrate that our leadership is not showing any back bone. I am not for another war. Obama wanted to go to war with Syria and I was with the majority who was against it. Iran has a nuclear weapon agenda. Obama is being played by the Iranian president who is just trying to appear compliant at the moment, while stalling for time. I can see right through it.

 

[Bowfinger]

... Obama is being played by the Iranian president who is just trying to appear compliant at the moment, while stalling for time. I can see right through it.

On the contrary, you are blinded by hatred. Your conclusion is biased speculation, driven by emotion instead of objective fact and reason.

 

[compuwiz1]

On the contrary, you are blinded by hatred. Your conclusion is biased speculation, driven by emotion instead of objective fact and reason.

Not sure where you get "hatred" from. It is possible to distrust people without hating them.

 

[fskimospy]

You people? I was being facetious, only to illustrate that our leadership is not showing any back bone. I am not for another war. Obama wanted to go to war with Syria and I was with the majority who was against it. Iran has a nuclear weapon agenda. Obama is being played by the Iranian president who is just trying to appear compliant at the moment, while stalling for time. I can see right through it.

Okay so now we know you don't want him to bomb them and you don't want him to talk to them. What do you want?

 

[Matt1970]

the only terrorists Obama does not negotiate with our the republicans in congress. Those guys are pure f-ing evil according to him.

Now THAT was funny.

 

[SirStev0]

Every indication about the new Iranian president is that he is an extreme (for Iran) moderate and very secular.

He is the exact President that country needed to turn around for the backwards trainwreck we (and Britain) caused in that country when we initiated the events that led to the current regime (and supported Saddam Hussein) to remove the communist.

Iran was incredibly progressive up until the west decided they were too socialist and forced them back to archaic tyrannical conservative Muslim rule.

 

[SirStev0]

Evidence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax

 

[K1052]

The consensus seems to be that the many years of increasingly punishing sanctions have taken a heavy toll on the Iranian people. The hardliners aren't getting the traction they used to so a more moderate president was elected in the hope of thawing relations with the west. If the new president is willing to put unrestricted monitoring of their nuclear programs on the table it's worthwhile to at least listen to what he's got to say. It's not like the CIA is going to forget Iran exists just because Obama had one phone call with Rouhani.

With respect to Putin...he needs some good PR going into Sochi showing that Russia can be a responsible actor and is still important. It didn't cost him much to twist Assad's arm into giving up the chems since he has no other allies and US action was potentially coming.

Foreign relations is not a zero sum game.

 

[Jaskalas]

The United States Does Not Negotiate With Terrorists

Look at this another way. Iran is the only thing standing between us and terrorists. They are the strongest Muslim nation in the reigion (the world?) right now. Even if their government is a terrorist kingpin - allowing them to have a leader can be beneficial. Command and control gives room for stability.

 

[kage69]

Another thread of arm chair diplomats pretending they're more informed then the power players. Seems like everyone has gotten super sensitive about negotiating style and appearances lately, which after 8 years of Bush embarrassing us almost daily I find kind of surprising. That should have 'thickened some skin', but then I suppose if you hate the guy why wouldn't you want to pretend that everything he is involved in results in some kind of crushing defeat.

Obama just needs to sell Iran some arms or throw up on a Prime minister, maybe some more traditional foreign policy might comfort his detractors.

I'm not about to blame Obama for the GOP failing to understand they lost the debate (and the elections that stood for it) and I support his current No Bullshit stance with republicans, who seem like they want to double down on their "party before country" idiocy, again.

Can you guys imagine the uproar and fury if Dems acted like this after Reagan was elected? After Cheney won again and wanted to ramp things up downrange, did we see the Dems pull any of this? Did the Dems start creating hostage situations when they repeatedly didn't get their way, or did they say "Well shit, guess we'll try next election."

Im going to wait and see what happens with this Iranian pres instead before I dismiss the last 2 years as failure. Things do seem to be improving though, which is encouraging.

 

[Dannar26]

On the contrary, you are blinded by hatred. Your conclusion is biased speculation, driven by emotion instead of objective fact and reason.

Oh, you're right. Let's just trust the nice terrorist! He (Iranian President) almost believes the Holocaust happened (depending on which translation you go for), so he must be a nice guy who represents a country of even keeled folk who don't want to bathe in Jewish (or American) blood.

 

[Ventanni]

Honestly I don't think Iran's primary goal is just to build a nuclear weapon here. I've started doing a lot of research as to why Russia has been so sensitive regarding the Syrian issue as of late, and not to come off as a conspiracy theorist, I think the other angle needs to be carefully taken into consideration.

Iran currently has the 2nd largest oil and gas reserves in the world, and currently produces about 4m barrels per day (refinery limited). Although Iran is a net exporter of energy, the vast majority of their electricity is generated through their own oil and natural gas resources. Iran wants to export all the oil and natural gas they can, so nuclear energy is an excellent alternative to produce electricity locally and export the rest. Since the Iranian government is also heavily reliant on oil revenues, this would be a great investment path to pursue.

Of course at this point, I feel things start sounding conspiracy theorist, so I must step back and remain objective. But basically, allowing Iran to pursue nuclear energy would greatly increase the oil exports flowing out of the country, which would in turn potentially threaten key US Allies (namely Israel) as a result of the increased Iranian government revenues. Even if Iran doesn't build a nuclear bomb, they could move to use those revenues to further fund their military, which could then be used to:

1) Threaten Israel militarily.
2) Attempt to cut off the Straight of Hormuz, which is a vital choke point for international trade. I say "attempt" because the US 5th Fleet is there, but any combat action will cause economic instability as I'm sure we all know from watching the stock market.

Now if Iran does build a nuclear bomb, then it does one thing; it makes them untouchable. It means they can more easily influence the Straight of Hormuz. It means they can more easily resist sanctions. Nobody wants a volatile player in the market, so keeping the Iranian government at its knees is the best option for all players in the region.

So where does Russia stand with all of this, and why are they more willing to sit at the negotiating table with Iran and Syria? I know Russia has tremendous economic investment in Syria, so their support for Assad makes perfect sense. But I can't objectively state why they support Iran more than everyone else does. I guess time will tell at this point.

 

[CanOWorms]

Since when did we start negotiating with terrorist states? We have the wrong president for this. We should all be very afraid of this tool.

Since the very beginning. For example, negotiating and allying with France during the war for independence.

 

[Fern]

Every indication about the new Iranian president is that he is an extreme (for Iran) moderate and very secular.
-snip-

Have you forgotten who actually runs Iran?

Hint: Like Israel it ain't the president.

Fern