<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 15 2008, 07:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I never insinuated that Obama or anyone else who wants to negotiate with Iran were traitors. I just don't think these people have a right to talk to us. Nor do I see any reason to talk with these people.</div> Of course they have a right to talk to us, it doesn't mean we approve of them. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>But I have to ask. What would merit physical response? Would it be an attack on a United States' fleet or group of soldiers or one of its allies? Would it be a bad vibe Obama would get from Ahmadinejad? Would it be if these talks break down?</div> Do you want to start a war with every country you don't like? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I can say right now with confidence, if anything ever happened to the United States or one of its allies (Israel), then Obama would take as much heat for negotiating with this man as Clinton and Bush did for not doing more to prevent 9/11.</div> Tell me the lotto numbers while you're at it. You're making a big deal about nothing. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>No, but this one is good.</div> Why? It's a flagrant scare tactic.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 15 2008, 07:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 15 2008, 07:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I never insinuated that Obama or anyone else who wants to negotiate with Iran were traitors. I just don't think these people have a right to talk to us. Nor do I see any reason to talk with these people.</div> </div> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Of course they have a right to talk to us, it doesn't mean we approve of them.</div> How's that? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>But I have to ask. What would merit physical response? Would it be an attack on a United States' fleet or group of soldiers or one of its allies? Would it be a bad vibe Obama would get from Ahmadinejad? Would it be if these talks break down?</div> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Do you want to start a war with every country you don't like?</div> Of course not. I would hope Iran would obey the UN resolutions and disarm their nuclear program. I would hope Ahmadianejad stops funding Hezbollah in their terroist operations. That's what I want to happen. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I can say right now with confidence, if anything ever happened to the United States or one of its allies (Israel), then Obama would take as much heat for negotiating with this man as Clinton and Bush did for not doing more to prevent 9/11.</div> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Tell me the lotto numbers while you're at it. You're making a big deal about nothing.</div> I don't understand how I'm making a big deal about it. I'm just saying what would happen if we got hurt after negotiating with this man. At the very least it would prove you and Obama wrong about the benefits with negotiating with these people. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>No, but this one is good.</div> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Why? It's a flagrant scare tactic.</div> Scaring who?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 15 2008, 07:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>How's that?</div> It hurts us? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Of course not. I would hope Iran would obey the UN resolutions and disarm their nuclear program. I would hope Ahmadianejad stops funding Hezbollah in their terroist operations. That's what I want to happen.</div> How does Obama not hope for the same? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Scaring who?</div> Simple, that negotiating is dangerous because he will sell out the country or Israel. Or else why are you against this? Look at what Bush said, so what if it is naive? If he's not a traitor, then don't worry about it. What kind of deals do you think he will he pull off? Jesus Christ. Basically, you are freaking out about negotiating without knowledge of what he will agree to. You're taking a shot at his character with little evidence. It's offensive in a sense.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 15 2008, 08:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 15 2008, 07:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>How's that?</div> It hurts us? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Of course not. I would hope Iran would obey the UN resolutions and disarm their nuclear program. I would hope Ahmadianejad stops funding Hezbollah in their terroist operations. That's what I want to happen.</div> How does Obama not hope for the same? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Scaring who?</div> Simple, that negotiating is dangerous because he will sell out the country or Israel. Or else why are you against this? Look at what Bush said, so what if it is naive? If he's not a traitor, then don't worry about it. Basically, you are freaking out about negotiating without knowledge of what he will agree to. you're taking a shot at his character and have little evidence. It's offensive in a sense. </div> 1. How does a terrorist group or head of state who is a terrorist have a right to negotiate with the United States? 2. I'm not denying that Obama would want the same. I have no doubt he does. I disagree with his method of going forward. The fact is Ahmadinejad has repeatedly defied numerous calls by the global community to disarm its' nuclear program. What could Obama possibly do to convince him otherwise, and even if he said "Yes, I will end my program," why in God's name would we ever believe this man? 3. How am I taking a shot at Obama's character?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 15 2008, 08:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 15 2008, 08:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 15 2008, 07:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>How's that?</div> It hurts us? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Of course not. I would hope Iran would obey the UN resolutions and disarm their nuclear program. I would hope Ahmadianejad stops funding Hezbollah in their terroist operations. That's what I want to happen.</div> How does Obama not hope for the same? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Scaring who?</div> Simple, that negotiating is dangerous because he will sell out the country or Israel. Or else why are you against this? Look at what Bush said, so what if it is naive? If he's not a traitor, then don't worry about it. Basically, you are freaking out about negotiating without knowledge of what he will agree to. you're taking a shot at his character and have little evidence. It's offensive in a sense. </div> 1. How does a terrorist group or head of state who is a terrorist have a right to negotiate with the United States? 2. I'm not denying that Obama would want the same. I have no doubt he does. I disagree with his method of going forward. The fact is Ahmadinejad has repeatedly defied numerous calls by the global community to disarm its' nuclear program. What could Obama possibly do to convince him otherwise, and even if he said "Yes, I will end my program," why in God's name would we ever believe this man? 3. How am I taking a shot at Obama's character? </div> If he's not going to screw the USA or Israel in some agreement, which he won't and have no proof he will, then don't worry about it.
Condi talked to North Korea and Libya, and nation-states are seen differently than terrorist negotiations. McCain is a disgusting hypocrite in this case with his support of Robert Gates, who supports engagement of Iran. Hours after he made a speech today about getting personal, he starts playing games.
The more Bush speaks, the more McCain will be hurting. I think McCain was doing pretty well for awhile since no one was talking about the war anymore. The more the war is brought back in focus, the more and more McCain gets hurt. Also, what is the big deal about Obama talking with these leaders. Sorry, but it seems like common sense to me that you want to be talking with every leader of the world. We aren't too good to talk to others. Like in 1959, Eisenhower refused to meet with Fidel Castro. In turn, Castro turns to the Soviet Union...setting up the Cuban Missile Crisis. Maybe it would have been a good idea to meet with Castro? (and Castro was pretty harmless). Why can we have nuclear weapons and not Iran? Also, to me, it seems like the terrorists are just this generations communists. Lets move to a non-interventionist policy fast, so the rest of the world can stop hating us, and retaliating against us.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ May 15 2008, 08:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The more Bush speaks, the more McCain will be hurting. I think McCain was doing pretty well for awhile since no one was talking about the war anymore. The more the war is brought back in focus, the more and more McCain gets hurt. Also, what is the big deal about Obama talking with these leaders. Sorry, but it seems like common sense to me that you want to be talking with every leader of the world. We aren't too good to talk to others. Like in 1959, Eisenhower refused to meet with Fidel Castro. In turn, Castro turns to the Soviet Union...setting up the Cuban Missile Crisis. Maybe it would have been a good idea to meet with Castro? (and Castro was pretty harmless). Why can we have nuclear weapons and not Iran? Also, to me, it seems like the terrorists are just this generations communists. Lets move to a non-interventionist policy fast, so the rest of the world can stop hating us, and retaliating against us.</div> Yeah, especially when the Republican Secretary of Defense agrees with Obama.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ May 15 2008, 08:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The more Bush speaks, the more McCain will be hurting. I think McCain was doing pretty well for awhile since no one was talking about the war anymore. The more the war is brought back in focus, the more and more McCain gets hurt.</div> McCain has tried to strike a balance. He wants and needs the support of the RNC and the conservative part of the Republican party that likes Bush and doesn't like McCain, but at the same time he cannot give validility to the Dems' attacks that he is "four more years of Bush." But McCain can tout that he is a harsh critic of Rumsfeld's policies in Iraq, and how he was a supporter of the surge two years ago when it wasn't a popular position to be on. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Also, what is the big deal about Obama talking with these leaders. Sorry, but it seems like common sense to me that you want to be talking with every leader of the world. We aren't too good to talk to others.</div> Unless they are terrorist dictators. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Like in 1959, Eisenhower refused to meet with Fidel Castro. In turn, Castro turns to the Soviet Union...setting up the Cuban Missile Crisis. Maybe it would have been a good idea to meet with Castro? (and Castro was pretty harmless).</div> Simple, The U.S. had an alternative. They thought they could overthrow the government of Cuba. They underestimated Cuba, and fucked it up. But Ike and the U.S. were not responsible for Fidel Castro turning to the Soviet Union. Castro lied about his communist leanings in '59, and would have ended up turning to the Soviet Union anyway. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Why can we have nuclear weapons and not Iran? Also, to me, it seems like the terrorists are just this generations communists. Lets move to a non-interventionist policy fast, so the rest of the world can stop hating us, and retaliating against us.</div> Simply insane. The USSR never blew up thousands of Americans in New York and Washington. Iran can't have a stable nuclear program, because its leader is anything but stable.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 15 2008, 09:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ May 15 2008, 08:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The more Bush speaks, the more McCain will be hurting. I think McCain was doing pretty well for awhile since no one was talking about the war anymore. The more the war is brought back in focus, the more and more McCain gets hurt.</div> McCain has tried to strike a balance. He wants and needs the support of the RNC and the conservative part of the Republican party that likes Bush and doesn't like McCain, but at the same time he cannot give validility to the Dems' attacks that he is "four more years of Bush." McCain can tout that he is a harsh critic of Rumsfeld's policies in Iraq, and how he was a supporter of the surge two years ago when it wasn't a popular position to be on. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Also, what is the big deal about Obama talking with these leaders. Sorry, but it seems like common sense to me that you want to be talking with every leader of the world. We aren't too good to talk to others.</div> Unless they are terrorist dictators. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Like in 1959, Eisenhower refused to meet with Fidel Castro. In turn, Castro turns to the Soviet Union...setting up the Cuban Missile Crisis. Maybe it would have been a good idea to meet with Castro? (and Castro was pretty harmless).</div> Simple, The U.S. had an alternative. They thought they could overthrow the government of Cuba. They underestimated Cuba, and fucked it up. But Ike and the U.S. were not responsible for Fidel Castro turning to the Soviet Union. Castro lied about his communist leanings in '59, and would have ended up turning to the Soviet Union anyway. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Why can we have nuclear weapons and not Iran? Also, to me, it seems like the terrorists are just this generations communists. Lets move to a non-interventionist policy fast, so the rest of the world can stop hating us, and retaliating against us.</div> This is one of the craziest things I've ever read. And I live in the NY Times' market. </div> Doesn't change the fact McCain is a hypocrite. So is Bush of course, that's a given.
There are very, very few politicians who aren't hypocrites, and this election race is making it very clear that all three remaining candidates fall into the hypocrite class.
We have no business trying to overthrow the Cuban government. That attack is valid reason for Cuba to attack us. 9/11 was blowback from our intervention in the Middle East. We could have stopped 9/11 if our defense wasn't crap under Bush, and even with the first plane slipping through, there was no excuse for the next 3. Why the hell were these planes not shot down? This thing is in General Election mode now, and the Democratic race is forgotten about. With it just being in the first week of the General Election campaign, the Republicans are already making asses out of themselves, as in this video: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/15/h...e_n_102020.html Yeah...Obama is going to win quite easily. As has been said, once people start putting into focus Obama vs. McCain, Obama will win easily.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ May 15 2008, 10:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>We have no business trying to overthrow the Cuban government. That attack is valid reason for Cuba to attack us. 9/11 was blowback from our intervention in the Middle East. We could have stopped 9/11 if our defense wasn't crap under Bush, and even with the first plane slipping through, there was no excuse for the next 3. Why the hell were these planes not shot down? This thing is in General Election mode now, and the Democratic race is forgotten about. With it just being in the first week of the General Election campaign, the Republicans are already making asses out of themselves, as in this video: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/15/h...e_n_102020.html Yeah...Obama is going to win quite easily. As has been said, once people start putting into focus Obama vs. McCain, Obama will win easily.</div> Utter nonsense, no matter how often it's repeated. Wahhabism doesn't need any acts by others to seek their destruction, only their existence.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 15 2008, 09:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There are very, very few politicians who aren't hypocrites, and this election race is making it very clear that all three remaining candidates fall into the hypocrite class.</div> Republicans are losing the issue of the war and how to handle diplomacy. The Democrats are much more united on this topic.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 15 2008, 10:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 15 2008, 09:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There are very, very few politicians who aren't hypocrites, and this election race is making it very clear that all three remaining candidates fall into the hypocrite class.</div> Republicans are losing the issue of the war and how to handle diplomacy. </div> Everybody's talking about diplomacy - but most everyone is also distorting both its value and its applicability. And Republicans have always been horrible at PR...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 15 2008, 09:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 15 2008, 10:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 15 2008, 09:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There are very, very few politicians who aren't hypocrites, and this election race is making it very clear that all three remaining candidates fall into the hypocrite class.</div> Republicans are losing the issue of the war and how to handle diplomacy. </div> Everybody's talking about diplomacy - but most everyone is also distorting both its value and its applicability. And Republicans have always been horrible at PR... </div> The Republicans have lost this specific topic when you have Bush's cabinet/staff and McCain contradicting him.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 15 2008, 10:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 15 2008, 09:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 15 2008, 10:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 15 2008, 09:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There are very, very few politicians who aren't hypocrites, and this election race is making it very clear that all three remaining candidates fall into the hypocrite class.</div> Republicans are losing the issue of the war and how to handle diplomacy. </div> Everybody's talking about diplomacy - but most everyone is also distorting both its value and its applicability. And Republicans have always been horrible at PR... </div> The Republicans have lost this specific topic when you have Bush's cabinet/staff and McCain contradicting him. </div> Before or after Bush contradicted his own strategy?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 15 2008, 09:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 15 2008, 10:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 15 2008, 09:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 15 2008, 10:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 15 2008, 09:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There are very, very few politicians who aren't hypocrites, and this election race is making it very clear that all three remaining candidates fall into the hypocrite class.</div> Republicans are losing the issue of the war and how to handle diplomacy. </div> Everybody's talking about diplomacy - but most everyone is also distorting both its value and its applicability. And Republicans have always been horrible at PR... </div> The Republicans have lost this specific topic when you have Bush's cabinet/staff and McCain contradicting him. </div> Before or after Bush contradicted his own strategy? </div> Lol, nice.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/15/h...e_n_102020.html</div> Although I should mention the clip BG7 posted was awesome. Kevin James got his ass owned. HaHaHa.
