Originally Posted by
midcan5
It strikes me a curious as that is what always happens in diplomacy, officials meet with others dignitaries to see if they are can arrive at some agreement.
Carter with the Israelis and Palestinian leaders
Reagan Gorbachev
Rumsfeld Hussein
Rice with many leaders
Bush with his brothers the Saudis
NK negotiations
I don't think people know what the word appease means, as talking to Iran is appeasing them how? And aren't we doing that now? Weird spin, this appeasement nonsense.
seems to me that other than perhaps Carter, who is a complete and utter tool who has put this country so far behind we are still making up for his mistakes, that all the leaders you've mentioned have required preconditions for negotiations. Reagan for example made sure America was in a position of strength working on SDI and making sure the Soviets were in a weaker position before negotiating with them.
In fact, it's pretty much common sense to any intelligent person outside the liberal world philosophy that you don't talk with enemies until you are in a position of strength over them so you don't have to give up important things. In the matter of Iran for example, I think it would be wise of we made sure that genocide of the Israelis is off the table before we negotiate with them. You can't really expect to get peace with a government that wants your death short of committing suicide or defeating them.
If we were as industrious to become good as to make ourselves great, we should become really great by being good, and the number of valuable men would be much increased; but it is a grand mistake to think of being great without goodness; and i pronounce it as certain that there was never yet a truly great man that was not at the same time truly virtuous." - Ben Franklin
Imagine what good we can do if we all joined together, united as followers of Christ - M. Russell Ballard
Reply With Quote
