Obama to meet with IRAN, SERIA, HAMAS in Turkey. (enemy, drug, soldiers)

[AeroGuyDC]

Originally Posted by domergurl

Oy

You honestly don't think that was STAGED????? By the former CIA chief who was the newly inaugurated Vice President????

Gullible much? Classic anti-intellectual ... oh noooooo!!! Must not read anything else other than what is spoon fed to me by Fox/Malkin/Coulter/Rush ... must keep head in the sand ...

REAGANISGOD
REAGANISGOD
REAGANISGOD

I think the gullibility rests with someone who can't prove that the hostage release situation was staged. Pure speculation. What is NOT speculation, is our boys came home after 444 days. Whether you like Reagan or not is irrelevant. Jimmy couldn't get it done. Ronnie did.

You give too much credit to George H.W. Bush. He was CIA director 1976-1977. If he had the power to stage a hostage release to coincide with an inauguration 3 years later, then he should have single-handedly ended the Cold War before Reagan ever got into office. Pure hot air.

[tinman01]

Obama is an Idealist. I honestly think that he means well and believes in what he is doing. The problem is the worst of the world view progressive thinking as a weakness. I have no issue with Obama meeting with those we consider to be our enemies. I do have a problem with the concept that we can save other countries from themselves. Some presidents think we can do it with our military. Some think that if we turn the other cheek often enough, give enough money away and apologize for all the wrongs in the world that everyone will love us.
No they will love the money and think us a fool. Carter the great peace maker was laughed at and taken advantage of by the USSR and countries like Lybia. It was Reagan who broke Lybia's back and knocked them out of the terror game. It was Reagan who broke the USSR. In the end he restored at least some of our National pride. He made it ok to be proud to be american again. But he too was wrong. We are not the worlds police force although the UN would use us as such.
We need to look within and fix our own problems and let other countries deal with their own. Iran is none of our business how they govern their people. Israel. They are a fickle friend at best and cost us way too much for what they return. Let Israel deal with their own problems for a change and just maybe they will be forced to look for peaceful solutions. I as a vet hate terrorists as much as anyone. They are cowards and murderers.
We can't and won't change what they are by sucking up to any of them.
We should have learned that lesson from our dealings with Saddam.

[Bluefly]

Originally Posted by BigJon3475

You think it's awesome he is legitimizing oppressive regimes?

I appreciate your perspective. For better or worse, at the heart of a progressive worldview is a sense that people are inherently good. The bad/evil comes from nurturing and socioeconomic / religious culture.

Either we push people as hard as we can and give them a reason to hate and attack us, or we extend a hand to even the most horrific regimes and show their people that there is a better way; that it no longer has to be "us versus them"; that we are not the white devil, but that we are a nation who chose to elect a brown man with the middle name "Hussein".

I believe Obama is striking a good tone - both corgial and firm. Obama's is a complex worldview. He has proven capable of pursuing two seemingly contradictory actions at once and achieving both.

[Ever Adrift]

I strongly support engaging Syria, Iran and even Hamas diplomatically. I'm all for diplomacy in general; we are far more likely to successfully influence our enemies and improve our standing in the world if we talk. Dialogue is productive; it's a means of improving understanding between vastly different interests and it's a means of promoting the kinds of trust that are often necessary for true progress in international disputes. A lack of diplomatic engagement pushes those who are ignored to seek other means of gaining attention and is likely to spur, rather than constrain, conflict.

Additionally, to those who would argue that we shouldn't engage Iran and Syria in diplomatic dialogue and who also supported George Bush's approach to international relations, keep in mind that while Bush (and McCain!) were not in support of talking with Iran because it was 'evil' he, at the same time, engaged in diplomacy with North Korea (which, I'd argue, is even more evil!) and actually supported giving foreign aid to Uzbekistan, which is no better than Iran!

[BigJon3475]

To talk negotiations would mean we have a ground to stand on or you're going to offer something effectively waving a white flag. Watch the appeasement and the celebration of the victory over the west and the American Empire when it happens. We're being sold out for a victory lap around the world, I'm sorry you folks can't see that. Look back at history and Chamberlain, Carter, Nixon, Ford, Kennedy. What you say to the rest of the world when you sit down with people like Ahmadinejad is he has a valid point in calling for the total destruction of Israel. What you say to Kim Jong-il is since you set off atomic bombs we give in, what do you want? What you say to Hamas is your missile lobbying at Israel has no consequences. All those stances end up in one position, a loss of control of the state and power to extremist who care nothing about the human rights you enjoy saying to millions of people give up your dreams of freedom so we can make a deal with your slave masters.

"As the imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map,"

[chielgirl]

Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC

I'll take the high-road and thank you for your service to country.

Why would you thank me for a decision I made for a career choice?
I’m a pacifist and as anti-war as anyone I know.

Originally Posted by BigJon3475

You think it's awesome he is legitimizing oppressive regimes?

Who needs the US to legitimize them? Oppressive regime, see Patriot Act.
Really awesome that Bush attacked a sovereign nation because “he tried to kill my daddy.”

[cuebald]

Originally Posted by MIKEETC

Kind of like that limp wrist Donald Rumsfeld had when shaking Saddam Hussein's hand...

There was a reason for that meeting.

Bush 41 wanted to sell Saddam some new WMDs.

Rummy was just the messenger. No word on whether he received a commission on the sale or if he was on straight salary.

[phonelady61]

I think dear mr president has enough going on in this country to keep him busy and he needs to stay his butt in the white house and take care of his countrys problems and stop telling people what they need to be doing . I think he needs to keep his butt home and worry about his own country ie : joblessness, homeless and etc .... and what is his wife doing there ? must she accompany him on everything . I think the both of them are glory hounds and they will most certainly miss the cameras when they are no longer in office . I did mean they cause michelle acts like she is the vice president .

[Bluefly]

^
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the job requirements are of a president in the 21st century global economy and society. We don't rise and fall in isolation and Mrs. Obama is doing a lot to build good will and support for our policies.

BigJon - You do realize that when their people see their leaders sit down with a U.S. president, they see their leaders giving credibility to and opening the door for a terrorizing occupier who has been responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths and is determined to undermine their way of life. I'm not saying all that's accurate, but the door swings both ways.

We need to talk to them. Your solution to be the stern father figure to the world just isn't realistic anymore.

[BigJon3475]

No ability to discern good from bad at all... People who oppress basic human rights deserve zero legitimacy. If they were arguing over gays being able to marry, that would be considered a success. Instead they kill women for being raped, they hang men for being gay and they lock people up for life for having wine while the oppress the freedom of speech. In NK, Kimmie is so oppressive is people are actually below the normal growth rate of civilized nations because of malnutrition (the thing everyone gawked at McCain about during the election).

There is no better example of what people behind the lines feel than Poland.

Natan Sharansky: (While in the soviet gulags)

"We were shouting through the corridors ignoring the warning of the prison guards because it was the great news that finally the leader of the this, of the free world calls a spade a spade"

Vaclav Havel:

"I thought that Reagan's policy was right, and that it was not giving up and not giving in, and that's what I liked about it in fact I liked it more than the policy of appeasement, of giving in. I've tried to talk to dictators to make them give a little. The policy of appeasement has been traditional in Europe and it has often led to disasters"

Though it might not be in the form of the red army anymore it still carries the same ugly face of the beast. Appeasement goes all the way back to Carthage and the Punic wars and probably even further back, you'll notice it was a failure then too. Bodies are left mangled and littered throughout the world and history with the hopes of appeasement, although it's been called many other names in the past. We're closer now than ever before to world wide freedom, but we can give in and up if it'll make you "feel" secure.

The stern father figure is the only thing that has worked throughout history. Find one appeased nation that was thirsty for control of the state and power and was oppressive that gave up when "asked" to and turned to freedom.