<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 20 2008, 08:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 20 2008, 08:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>His naive view that democracy can flourish anywhere is harshly mistaken. Whereas Obama believes practically the same thing Robert Gates and McCain do.</div> If that's the case why is McCain attacking Obama? </div> Kitchen sink strategy.
Obama thinks we need to be in Iraq for 100 years? That's news to me. Here's the deal. Iran is working towards getting nukes. They're going to use diplomatic meetings as a means to stall while they get their nukes. That's just what they've done so far, as diplomatic efforts have accomplished nothing for 7 years. Iran's been offered civilian nuclear power assistance from Russia. If they wanted anything less than the bomb under all circumstances, they'd have taken them up on it. And the US would have almost certainly then taken up direct talks with Iran. What exactly do you think Obama is going to offer Iran in direct talks? Iran's hand will only be stronger after they stall and get nukes AND after we surrender Iraq to them.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 20 2008, 08:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Obama thinks we need to be in Iraq for 100 years? That's news to me.</div> Lol, what? I'm talking about Hamas. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Here's the deal. Iran is working towards getting nukes. They're going to use diplomatic meetings as a means to stall while they get their nukes. That's just what they've done so far, as diplomatic efforts have accomplished nothing for 7 years. Iran's been offered civilian nuclear power assistance from Russia. If they wanted anything less than the bomb under all circumstances, they'd have taken them up on it. And the US would have almost certainly then taken up direct talks with Iran. What exactly do you think Obama is going to offer Iran in direct talks? Iran's hand will only be stronger after they stall and get nukes AND after we surrender Iraq to them.</div> How have we not already lost Iraq? Well Denny I respect your mostly mature demeanor (no sarcasm) while debating, but you've made no point at all regarding what Bush said. You bring up fair points at times but I don't see your purpose this time, Bush's speech was full of ignorance. If Iran doesn't want to comply with the US in negotiations, then everything will stay the same. That's all.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 20 2008, 07:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 20 2008, 08:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Obama thinks we need to be in Iraq for 100 years? That's news to me.</div> Lol, what? I'm talking about Hamas. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Here's the deal. Iran is working towards getting nukes. They're going to use diplomatic meetings as a means to stall while they get their nukes. That's just what they've done so far, as diplomatic efforts have accomplished nothing for 7 years. Iran's been offered civilian nuclear power assistance from Russia. If they wanted anything less than the bomb under all circumstances, they'd have taken them up on it. And the US would have almost certainly then taken up direct talks with Iran. What exactly do you think Obama is going to offer Iran in direct talks? Iran's hand will only be stronger after they stall and get nukes AND after we surrender Iraq to them.</div> How have we not already lost Iraq? Well Denny I respect your mostly mature demeanor (no sarcasm) while debating, but you've made no point at all regarding what Bush said. You bring up fair points at times but I don't see your purpose this time, Bush's speech was full of ignorance. If Iran doesn't want to comply with the US in negotiations, then everything will stay the same. That's all. </div> There's political pressure to get something done once the talks begin. It's you who've made no point. I'm not blindly in love with any candidate, so maybe I'm seeing things a little more realistically? You might want to pay a little attention to AEM's posts - he's a middle-east scholar, think tank material. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6082100143.html Iran Rejects Offer For Nuclear Talks Demand for Immediate Freeze Cited The Iranian government has told senior European officials that it will not accept the only condition set by the Bush administration and its Western allies for talks on the country's nuclear program and will continue enriching uranium, despite the threat of international sanctions, several senior U.S. and European officials said yesterday. Diplomats in Washington, Tehran and European capitals said the Iranian government is willing to enter negotiations and to consider a freeze of the program, but it will not accept a freeze as a precondition for the talks. The Iranian position is nearly identical to its initial reaction to the offer, which was presented in June and includes a package of U.S.-backed economic and political incentives. U.S., British and French diplomats concluded yesterday, after receiving word of Iran's intention, that the government simply bought time to advance its nuclear program, rather than scale it back as the U.N. resolution requires.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 20 2008, 09:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 20 2008, 07:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 20 2008, 08:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Obama thinks we need to be in Iraq for 100 years? That's news to me.</div> Lol, what? I'm talking about Hamas. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Here's the deal. Iran is working towards getting nukes. They're going to use diplomatic meetings as a means to stall while they get their nukes. That's just what they've done so far, as diplomatic efforts have accomplished nothing for 7 years. Iran's been offered civilian nuclear power assistance from Russia. If they wanted anything less than the bomb under all circumstances, they'd have taken them up on it. And the US would have almost certainly then taken up direct talks with Iran. What exactly do you think Obama is going to offer Iran in direct talks? Iran's hand will only be stronger after they stall and get nukes AND after we surrender Iraq to them.</div> How have we not already lost Iraq? Well Denny I respect your mostly mature demeanor (no sarcasm) while debating, but you've made no point at all regarding what Bush said. You bring up fair points at times but I don't see your purpose this time, Bush's speech was full of ignorance. If Iran doesn't want to comply with the US in negotiations, then everything will stay the same. That's all. </div> There's political pressure to get something done once the talks begin. It's you who've made no point. I'm not blindly in love with any candidate, so maybe I'm seeing things a little more realistically? You might want to pay a little attention to AEM's posts - he's a middle-east scholar, think tank material. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6082100143.html Iran Rejects Offer For Nuclear Talks Demand for Immediate Freeze Cited The Iranian government has told senior European officials that it will not accept the only condition set by the Bush administration and its Western allies for talks on the country's nuclear program and will continue enriching uranium, despite the threat of international sanctions, several senior U.S. and European officials said yesterday. Diplomats in Washington, Tehran and European capitals said the Iranian government is willing to enter negotiations and to consider a freeze of the program, but it will not accept a freeze as a precondition for the talks. The Iranian position is nearly identical to its initial reaction to the offer, which was presented in June and includes a package of U.S.-backed economic and political incentives. U.S., British and French diplomats concluded yesterday, after receiving word of Iran's intention, that the government simply bought time to advance its nuclear program, rather than scale it back as the U.N. resolution requires. </div> All I see is vague references and overt fear mongering. "EVERYTHING" ends in nuclear holocaust. "WORST CASE" scenario, that's all I get from you. You're blindly in love with conservatives. If you're going to throw that card out there, it applies to you. Weak evidence.
^ Thanks for the compliment, Denny. I just hope the institute where I've been interning has/creates a spot for me... Check your PMs for the other update.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 20 2008, 09:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wait a second here, I give you the Washington Post, and you give me Obama's talking points? LOL</div> You insinuated the worst case possible, and continue to ignore Afghanistan. Bush is a clown and continues to be quite weak on foreign policy. Your joke excuses about Iraq's democracy are only amusing. Bush cost us that too, and a "democracy" their proves nothing.
I insinuate reality. Reality is that the only thing keeping Iran out of Iraq is the presence of our troops. Reality is that voters in Iraq have turned out to vote 2 or 3 times, in bigger numbers %-wise than we see here in the USA. The numbers do indicate the people there want democracy and for it to work. I find it rather sad that people are interested in inflicting revenge in Afghanistan, while the humanitarian cause in Iraq is downplayed for political gain. Saying it's a joke isn't a well articulated argument for anything.
Obama said during his interview on Fox News yesteday, and I quote: "Because we haven't been talking to Iran, Iran has been developing nuclear weapons, funding Hamas, funding Hezbollah." What exactly does he mean by that? That because we haven't been talking to Iran they've been doing this, and if we talk to them they'll cease?
^ LOL, yeah sure, it's because of us not 'talking to them' that the wannabe hegemonistic Iranian government is trying to obtain nuclear weapons. Whatever idiot policy advisor gave him that line should find himself on the unemployment line quickly. The statement as written is just plain idiotic.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 21 2008, 10:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I insinuate reality. Reality is that the only thing keeping Iran out of Iraq is the presence of our troops. Reality is that voters in Iraq have turned out to vote 2 or 3 times, in bigger numbers %-wise than we see here in the USA. The numbers do indicate the people there want democracy and for it to work. I find it rather sad that people are interested in inflicting revenge in Afghanistan, while the humanitarian cause in Iraq is downplayed for political gain. Saying it's a joke isn't a well articulated argument for anything.</div> Reality is you ignoring how much stronger we've made Hamas.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 21 2008, 03:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>^ LOL, yeah sure, it's because of us not 'talking to them' that the wannabe hegemonistic Iranian government is trying to obtain nuclear weapons. Whatever idiot policy advisor gave him that line should find himself on the unemployment line quickly. The statement as written is just plain idiotic.</div> Yeah I definitely agree he's been given some bad lines, yet the criticism he's received at times is just splitting hairs. Like Aggressive negotiating for example.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 21 2008, 09:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 21 2008, 10:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I insinuate reality. Reality is that the only thing keeping Iran out of Iraq is the presence of our troops. Reality is that voters in Iraq have turned out to vote 2 or 3 times, in bigger numbers %-wise than we see here in the USA. The numbers do indicate the people there want democracy and for it to work. I find it rather sad that people are interested in inflicting revenge in Afghanistan, while the humanitarian cause in Iraq is downplayed for political gain. Saying it's a joke isn't a well articulated argument for anything.</div> Reality is you ignoring how much stronger we've made Hamas. </div> Hamas? That's a bit of a tangent, considering that Olmert has much to do with Hamas' recent empowerment as the present US administration.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 21 2008, 09:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 21 2008, 03:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>^ LOL, yeah sure, it's because of us not 'talking to them' that the wannabe hegemonistic Iranian government is trying to obtain nuclear weapons. Whatever idiot policy advisor gave him that line should find himself on the unemployment line quickly. The statement as written is just plain idiotic.</div> Yeah I definitely agree he's been given some bad lines, yet the criticism he's received at times is just splitting hairs. Like Aggressive negotiating for example. </div> He really can't afford to serve up ones like this though. It makes it easier to lump less ridiculous statements in with this kind of idiocy. I'm seriously waiting for someone to be replaced any day now.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 21 2008, 08:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 21 2008, 09:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 21 2008, 03:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>^ LOL, yeah sure, it's because of us not 'talking to them' that the wannabe hegemonistic Iranian government is trying to obtain nuclear weapons. Whatever idiot policy advisor gave him that line should find himself on the unemployment line quickly. The statement as written is just plain idiotic.</div> Yeah I definitely agree he's been given some bad lines, yet the criticism he's received at times is just splitting hairs. Like Aggressive negotiating for example. </div> He really can't afford to serve up ones like this though. It makes it easier to lump less ridiculous statements in with this kind of idiocy. I'm seriously waiting for someone to be replaced any day now. </div> Can't disagree with that.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 21 2008, 08:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 21 2008, 09:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 21 2008, 10:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I insinuate reality. Reality is that the only thing keeping Iran out of Iraq is the presence of our troops. Reality is that voters in Iraq have turned out to vote 2 or 3 times, in bigger numbers %-wise than we see here in the USA. The numbers do indicate the people there want democracy and for it to work. I find it rather sad that people are interested in inflicting revenge in Afghanistan, while the humanitarian cause in Iraq is downplayed for political gain. Saying it's a joke isn't a well articulated argument for anything.</div> Reality is you ignoring how much stronger we've made Hamas. </div> Hamas? That's a bit of a tangent, considering that Olmert has much to do with Hamas' recent empowerment as the present US administration. </div> Democratic elections there proved nothing, we also had a role in their surge. In fact we wanted to overrule these great democratic elections that magically solve everything.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 21 2008, 10:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 21 2008, 08:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 21 2008, 09:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 21 2008, 10:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I insinuate reality. Reality is that the only thing keeping Iran out of Iraq is the presence of our troops. Reality is that voters in Iraq have turned out to vote 2 or 3 times, in bigger numbers %-wise than we see here in the USA. The numbers do indicate the people there want democracy and for it to work. I find it rather sad that people are interested in inflicting revenge in Afghanistan, while the humanitarian cause in Iraq is downplayed for political gain. Saying it's a joke isn't a well articulated argument for anything.</div> Reality is you ignoring how much stronger we've made Hamas. </div> Hamas? That's a bit of a tangent, considering that Olmert has much to do with Hamas' recent empowerment as the present US administration. </div> Democratic elections there proved nothing, we also had a role in their surge. In fact we wanted to overrule these great democratic elections that magically solve everything. </div> Well, it should be noted that despite their trappings, the Palestinian 'elections' in fact bore extremely little resemblance to actual democratic process. In point of fact, as a simple matter of survival, Palestinians in Hamas-controlled areas voted Hamas, and those in PLO-controlled areas voted Fatah. It really reflected a change in the balance of power on the ground, as in who would kill anyone foolish enough NOT to vote for the local power. That's not democracy, it's classic power games masquerading as such. Nothing new in the Mid-East, of course, though disappointing all the same. Up until recently, the Palestinians were among the best-educated in the Middle East...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ May 21 2008, 06:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 21 2008, 09:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 21 2008, 10:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I insinuate reality. Reality is that the only thing keeping Iran out of Iraq is the presence of our troops. Reality is that voters in Iraq have turned out to vote 2 or 3 times, in bigger numbers %-wise than we see here in the USA. The numbers do indicate the people there want democracy and for it to work. I find it rather sad that people are interested in inflicting revenge in Afghanistan, while the humanitarian cause in Iraq is downplayed for political gain. Saying it's a joke isn't a well articulated argument for anything.</div> Reality is you ignoring how much stronger we've made Hamas. </div> Hamas? That's a bit of a tangent, considering that Olmert has much to do with Hamas' recent empowerment as the present US administration. </div> D'oh!
