Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Do you think this "no talk" policy will land us in another war?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
riona Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-20-06 07:43 AM
Original message
Do you think this "no talk" policy will land us in another war?
This is part of an interview with Seymour Hersh.

"Bush doesn't talk to people he's mad at. He doesn't talk to the North Koreans. He didn't talk to the insurgency. When the history is done, there were incredible efforts by the insurgency leaders in the summer of 2003. I’m talking about the Iraqi insurgency, the former Sunni generals and Sunni and Baathist leaders who were happy to see Saddam go, but did not want America there. They wanted to talk to us. Bush wouldn't. Whether it got to Bush, I don’t know, it got in to four stars. Nobody wanted to talk to them. He doesn't talk to the president of Syria; in fact, specifically rejects overtures from al-Asad to us. And he doesn't talk to the Iranians. There's been no bilateral communication at all.

Iran has come hat-in-hand to us. A former National Security Council adviser who worked in the White House, Flynt Leverett, an ex-C.I.A. analyst who's now working at Brookings, wrote a piece a month or so ago, maybe six weeks ago, in the New York Times, describing specific offers by the Iranians to come and ‘let's deal.’ Let's deal on all issues. I’m even told they were willing to talk about recognizing Israel. And the White House doesn't talk. And it's not that he doesn't talk, it's that nobody pressures him to talk. There's no pressure from the media, no pressure from Congress. Here's a president who won't talk to people he's walking us into a confrontation with."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
wtbymark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-20-06 07:48 AM
Response to Original message
1. because thats what he wants - period
congress who? what a joke - oversight? yea right. Media? bwaahahahaha

"You say you want a revolution yea you know"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-20-06 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. because he is the decider
the arrogance and stubbornness of this maniac is very dangerous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donna Zen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-20-06 07:59 AM
Response to Original message
2. One night on faux
...whoever the jerk was, maybe Hannity, pooh-poohed General Clark when he called for direct talks with Iran. The General said that he knew that there were factions within Iran that wanted to talk because: "they talk to me." Kinda shut-up the fauxer, but only for that segment. As soon as a credible voice was off the set, they returned to their usual anti-diplomacy blather.


Does any one of those jerks understand that their super-hero Ronny talked to the Evil Empire. If bush had been in office prior to its fall, the Berlin Wall would still standing.

Yes, if there are no direct talks, the Iranians will be pushed even harder to the wall, and that is a recipe for war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-20-06 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Nixon went to China and hugged Mao. China already had Nukes
Edited on Thu Apr-20-06 09:31 AM by Tom Rinaldo
And China was the biggest supplier of weapons to the Vietnamese who fought and killed tens of thousands of American soldiers. And Reagan held summits with the leader of the "Evil Empire".

George W. Bush's unofficial doctrine of "we will not hold talks with our enemies until they stop being our enemy" is a prescription for war, nothing else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-20-06 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
4. I believe that's what Bush is counting on. He thinks that another
war with "terrorists" will boost his ratings and give him some more political capital. The man is a dangerous fool and tool of PNAC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 06:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC