What a bunch of crap. Count me as one who disagrees with you.

One of the few things that President Bush has done that could be held up as an example of dealing with untrustworthy “leaders” is his total ignoring of Arafat, for years. Arafat was corrupt (millions in aid diverted to his accounts while his people lived in squallor), a profligate lier (said one thing in english, and another in Arabic – the same day) and known to be directly responcible for murder of Americans, in 1973 at the Saudi Khartoom embassy take over. Obviously negotiating with such an adversary is pointless, except for the photo op.

The Iranians and North Koreans are similarly untrustworthy negotiating partners. They are more akin to extortionists.

To think, given the last 20 years of experience, that anyone should negotiate with either Iran or the North Koreans is an excellent example of the “triumph of hope over experience”. The recent progress with North Korea, is an illusion or temporary, to slow their starvation, and help Bush look a little better, nothing more. If you think otherwise, you should consider the possibility that you are incapable of following evidence to a logical conclusion.

Negotiating with Iran, that is corrupt domisticaly and the world’s biggest supporter of terrorism is an exercise in self delusion. Obama would be real good at that, particularly the photo opportunities. Under Obama we would have another “end of history” period, as under Clinton, ignoring mounting threats. He would give us the same agressive talk with the same limp wristed responses to acts of war, such as the first World Trade Center bombing, the attempted assisination of a former President in Kuwait in ‘93 by Saddam, the bombing of our soldiers in ‘96 in Saudi Arabia, by Iran, the ‘98 bombing of 2 embassies in Africa by Bin Laden.

Obama would be a one term disaster for our foreign policy, setting us up for nuclear terrorism.

Tom Horne

Didn’t need to, the Soviets did it for us, with hand tools. You sir, need to read up on a little history.

“In matters of style swim with the current in matters of principle stand like a rock.”
- Thomas Jefferson

I know a poisonous creed when I see one, I know a cancerous tumor that needs removing, and Islam is such a one. You and your fellow Iranian expats are hostages of Islam, as are many Muslims within Islam itself. That is a great human tragedy, but the mind-shackles of Islam make it nearly impossible to get good advice from those who still remain Islam’s hostages.

It’s high time we begin taking our own counsel viz. the Islamic menace. For two long we have turned our ear to the clouded voices of frightened hostages who still retain too much of the mind-shackles of Islam to speak about what measures must be taken to win.

I know that if we wish to survive Islam’s greatest push to conquer earth since Jihad’s birth, that we must not negotiate our way into accommodation, but take genuine steps to see the ideology of Jihad annihilated. It’s what is required when dealing with genocidal muderous ideologies bent on world dominion. Think Nazi. Think Japanese Imperium. Two other genocidal strands which required neutralization. And they didn’t have nukes, and didn’t number more than a billion, and hadn’t been allowed into the West in their millions to run amok as Muslims and their apologists are clearly doing today.

The actual solution is simple, requiring only that the problem be looked at from a different perspective. Iran is a sovereign nation, as such building nuclear weapons is their right. IF they do it themselves without outside help. That is what Israel, India and Pakistan did.
What Iran did was join the NPT, which is a diplomatic agreement that is intended to allow mudhole nations to gain the benefits of nuclear power without building any bombs. Part of the NPT is an agreement to allow the UN (IAEA) access to the Iranian nuclear facilities built with Western technology and aid. Iran has breached that treaty.
It makes no sense to work out a new treaty with a nation that won’t adhere to the old one.
So the issue isn’t Iran building nukes, it’s breaching the NPT to do so.
To solution is for the USA to withdraw from the NPT. The NPT prohibits any party from selling nuclear weapons to a non-nuclear state. Once the USA withdraws from that treay, we can sell nukes to whomever we want to. I think there is a 3 month lag time between giving notice and the actual moment of withdrawal.
Withdrawal with give the USA control of the negotiation process. If China and Russia don’t get on board with sanctions against Iran, then we sell their enemies nukes.
LOTS of nukes, the USA at the peak of the cold war had over 22,000 nuclear weapons. While the weapons were destroyed, the part that goes boooom was not. It’s called a’pit’ and the USA still has over 20,000 of them in storage. The ‘pit’ is the hard part of a nuclear weapon to make. Those pits can be turned into weapons at the rate of a dozen or so per week, unless it was an emergency, in which case after few months or so for training and building new assembly rooms, we could build hundreds per week.

No funeral for me. I get cremated and dropped over the side of the USS Kearsarge. It’s a done deal, all I have to do is die, which won’t be long now.
Since I most likely exceeded your reading skills, let me repeat in a more simplified manner.
Sell Nuclear weapons to Iran’s enemies if they don’t live up to their treaty requirements. Sell nuclear weapons to Russia’s enemies if they don’t live up to their treaty requirements. Ditto for China. Russia and China are BOTH in breach of article 1 of the NPT. After this last gasp diplomacy fails, THEN we bomb them back to the stone age.
What we should NEVER do is sign a treaty with a known treaty breaker. It’s just tooooooo stooooopid for words. Only the liberals at the Department of State could think that is a good idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty

Great speech. Never mind the ad-hominem that your type of arguments seem to require. But tell this idiotic speech to the burqa clad walking bomb you’ll be meeting if we don’t use force against Iran. Of course said iranian walking bomb considers it immoral for you to look into your eyes, blowing herself up killing you and maiming your wife and children for life, however, that is the most moral act any muslim could ever commit.

At some point, it will no longer matter how many innocent Iranians there are. At some point we won’t have a choice. It did not matter how many innocent people there were in Dresden. It won’t matter how many there are in Teheran.

Let’s give this a constructive answer : anyone who does not actively oppose evil, by acts, not words, cannot be considered innocent. Innosense is limited to resistance fighters in Iran. Nobody else can claim it. Neither can western “no war with Iran” “intellectuals” claim innosense.

Cheering on while someone else is massacring your enemies is NOT innocent. You sir, are not innocent, but aiding and abetting genocide. There will be many more, much more innocent, civilians dead if we DON’T attack Iran.