An Ol’ Broad’s Ramblings
Obama Is Wrong!
From Henry Kissinger’s own lips:
Henry Kissinger believes Barack Obama misstated his views on diplomacy with US adversaries and is not happy about being mischaracterized. He says: “Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality.”
I wonder if the MSM will call B. Hussein on this gaffe? Naw….why would they do that? We’re sheep, who believe every word that comes out of their sacred mouths!
Pfft!
H/T: Stop the ACLU
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
9 Comments »
R.I.P. »
To be clear, here are Kissinger’s exact words:
KISSINGER: Well, I am in favor of negotiating with Iran. And one utility of negotiation is to put before Iran our vision of a Middle East, of a stable Middle East, and our notion on nuclear proliferation at a high enough level so that they have to study it. And, therefore, I actually have preferred doing it at the secretary of state level so that we — we know we’re dealing with authentic…
(CROSSTALK)
SESNO: Put at a very high level right out of the box?
KISSINGER: Initially, yes. And I always believed that the best way to begin a negotiation is to tell the other side exactly what you have in mind and what you are — what the outcome is that you’re trying to achieve so that they have something that they can react to.
Now, the permanent members of the Security Council, plus Japan and Germany, have all said nuclear weapons in Iran are unacceptable. They’ve never explained what they mean by this. So if we go into a negotiation, we ought to have a clear understanding of what is it we’re trying to prevent. What is it going to do if we can’t achieve what we’re talking about?
But I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations. We ought, however, to be very clear about the content of negotiations and work it out with other countries and with our own government.
And here are Obama’s remarks:
OBAMA: Senator McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who’s one of his advisers, who, along with five recent secretaries of state, just said that we should meet with Iran — guess what — without precondition. This is one of your own advisers.
Now, understand what this means “without preconditions.” It doesn’t mean that you invite them over for tea one day. What it means is that we don’t do what we’ve been doing, which is to say, “Until you agree to do exactly what we say, we won’t have direct contacts with you.”
There’s a difference between preconditions and preparation. Of course we’ve got to do preparations, starting with low-level diplomatic talks, and it may not work, because Iran is a rogue regime.
But I will point out that I was called naive when I suggested that we need to look at exploring contacts with Iran. And you know what? President Bush recently sent a senior ambassador, Bill Burns, to participate in talks with the Europeans around the issue of nuclear weapons.
Again, it may not work, but if it doesn’t work, then we have strengthened our ability to form alliances to impose the tough sanctions that Senator McCain just mentioned.
And when we haven’t done it, as in North Korea — let me just take one more example — in North Korea, we cut off talks. They’re a member of the axis of evil. We can’t deal with them.
And you know what happened? They went — they quadrupled their nuclear capacity. They tested a nuke. They tested missiles. They pulled out of the nonproliferation agreement. And they sent nuclear secrets, potentially, to countries like Syria.
When we re-engaged — because, again, the Bush administration reversed course on this — then we have at least made some progress, although right now, because of the problems in North Korea, we are seeing it on shaky ground.
And — and I just — so I just have to make this general point that the Bush administration, some of Senator McCain’s own advisers all think this is important, and Senator McCain appears resistant.
It was boring enough the first time around.
BO said HE would sit down and talk to the commies and socialists and terrorists. Sending lower level bureaucrats is NOT the same thing. Ergo…BO is full of male bovine excrement.
Yes, direct quotes can be boring. But they are the actual words.
I don’t perceive a secretary of state (the level at which Kissinger supports unconditional negotiations with the terrorist-supporting Tehran regime) as being a “low-level bureaucrat.” That may be a simple difference between us, though.
@Ian:
A deputy SoS IS a lower level bureaucrat. And we’ve been talking to them at that level. BHO said HE would chat with the terrorists. Can’t change history y’know, even though he is trying.
Again, I don’t perceive Bush’s undersecretary of state as being that low a level (our negotiator at Geneva was an undersec, not deputy undersec). I respect the difference we have on that, though. And Kissinger and Obama both support negotiations at a level one step above that (cabinet level), and Obama has said that he reserves the right to negotiate with anyone face-to-face if it will protect Americans.
@Ian:
Nothing is BHO’s history tells me he give a flying flip about the American people! Nothing!
Okay.
But to recap the two campaign positions:
McCain is for low-level negotiations with Iran, without preconditions, which, if successful, could lead to cabinet-level talks.
Obama is for low-level negotiations with Iran, without preconditions, which, if successful, could lead to summit-level talks.
These positions don’t really seem to be vastly different.
@Ian:
If that’s the way you choose to see it…….