An Ol’ Broad’s Ramblings
Living In The Land Of Oz
As President Bush commemorated Israel’s 60th anniversary by attacking Barack Obama from overseas, here at home he found an all-too-frequent ally: John McCain.
Uh….no, actually he said a Senator during WWII had said “if he had only talked to Hilter”…. Get the facts straight you egotistical putz!
When Bush accused “some” — including Obama, Bush aides explained — of “the false comfort of appeasement,” McCain echoed this slander.
Slander? What slander? Is he saying Hussein never said he’d chat with Ahmabooboo with NO preconditions? Sorry Scary, but that’s exactly what he said. Again….facts!
Slander is an untruthful oral (spoken) statement about a person that harms the person’s reputation or standing in the community.
John, ya might want to use a dictionary the next time you put pen to paper!
“What does he want to talk about with [Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad?” McCain asked, fumbling to link Obama to the Iranian president’s hateful words. Soon, a GOP talking point was born.
Wow! I didn’t know the non leadership of the GOP read my blog, and many others, who have been saying the same dadburn thing. And I tell ya, I’m no big McFeingold fan, but this is one thing he didn’t fumbled on.
Lost in the rhetoric was the question America deserves to have answered: Why should we engage with Iran?
In short, not talking to Iran has failed. Miserably.
Oh, I dunno about that. Works pretty well for me. Of course, if the UN wasn’t full of a bunch of APPEASERS, perhaps Iran wouldn’t be at the point they are now? Just a thought.
Bush engages in self-deception arguing that not engaging Iran has worked. In fact, Iran has grown stronger: continuing to master the nuclear fuel cycle; arming militias in Iraq and Lebanon; bolstering extremist anti-Israeli proxies. It has embraced Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and spends lavishly to rebuild Afghanistan, gaining influence across the region.
Which tells me a couple of things: One, we should go ahead and bomb both of those useless countries back to the 12th century, where they want to be anyway; and two, al Maliki is sucking up to ‘Booboo, and stabbing US in the back.
Instead of backing Bush’s toxic rhetoric, McCain should have called George H.W. Bush’s secretary of state, James Baker. After years of stonewalling, the administration grudgingly tested the Baker-Hamilton report’s recommendation and opened talks with Iran — albeit low-level dialogue restricted to the subject of Iraq. Is James Baker an appeaser, too?
Toxic? No, Bush is a lot of things, but ‘toxic’ isn’t one of them. Well, unless you are leftist Dhimmi. The Iranians have flat out stated they want to destroy Israel, and us. So, Scary parroting Hussein’s “let’s have tea” nonsense tells me we made a wiser choice in ‘04. Oh, and what have those low-level chats accomplished so far? Iran still wants to destroy Israel, and us, and all Western civilization. Yep, that’s working real well.
While the president attacks political opponents from the Knesset, responsible members of his own administration meet face to face with Iranians. Yes, Ahmadinejad’s words often are abhorrent, and often Iran has played a poisonous role in Middle East politics. But when our ambassador to Iraq meets with his Iranian counterpart, he isn’t courting “the false comfort of appeasement” — he is facing the reality that Iran exerts influence in Iraq. That’s why Defense Secretary Bob Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have called for engaging Iran. Appeasers all? Nonsense.
“Often abhorrent”? How about downright dangerous! Perhaps those chats with the Iranians are emphasizing the idea they had better knock it off! You know, stop supplying the terrorists with weapons, stop trying to become a nuclear power with the intent of starting a MAJOR confrontation. Maybe they are setting those same ‘pre-conditions’ that Hussein doesn’t think he needs to have a conversation?
Opponents of dialogue often quip that talking isn’t a strategy. Walking away isn’t a strategy, either. McCain says that “there’s only one thing worse than the United States exercising the military option, that is, a nuclear-armed Iran.” But for all his professed reluctance, when McCain disavows diplomacy, he is stacking the deck in favor of war.
No, actually, I don’t think he is “stacking the deck”. Iran has been doing that since 1979, when Jimmah, the biggest appeaser of all, was in the White House. You notice that they were released when Reagan was sworn in, because they KNEW they’d get their collective asses kicked if they didn’t. Reagan wasn’t an appeaser.
Dialogue helps us isolate Ahmadinejad rather than empowering him to isolate us. More important, even if we fail to reach an agreement, engaging Iran will spark three conversations likely to strengthen our position.
Where does he come up with this stuff? Dialogue with ‘Booboo will give him legitimacy, to the point where he can say “See? Even the Americans fear us and want to talk!” That, in my opinion, is more than just a little dangerous.
The first is between our leaders and Iran’s. From nonproliferation to counterterrorism, frankly, Iran won’t care for much of what we have to say — but at the right moment, it is not unreasonable to think Tehran would cut a deal in exchange for economic incentives, energy assistance, diplomatic normalization or a noninvasion guarantee.
Why is it that the left assumes that these are reasonable people, who are guided by logic? Nothing could be farther from the truth. They are ruled by a book that provokes hatred and violence, and the destruction of anything, and anyone, who does not subscribe to that same book. Get a grip!
Some have asserted that meeting with Iran’s leaders would legitimize Ahmadinejad, who is neither Iran’s supreme leader nor someone whom Obama specifically promised to meet. Curiously, many critics then hype Ahmadinejad as a threat of historic proportions, thereby granting the stature they seek to deny. Iranian elections in mid-2009 could yield a less objectionable president; engaging Iran makes that more likely.
Well, actually, he’s a small man, likely with a tiny weenie, but a HUGE ego. Napoleon comes to mind, and look what he did. Then, there was Hitler, and we KNOW what he did to the world. So, is MR Scary suggesting we should play Neville Chamberlain?
As Iran’s centrifuges churn out enriched uranium, we’re asking the wrong question. Instead of wondering why Barack Obama wants to talk with Iran, we should ask: “What are George Bush and John McCain waiting for?”
Good question! Why haven’t we taken out Iran’s nuclear facilities?
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
