that they 'Clearly' and 'Publicly' stated. . . ....that the ONLY reason they suggested 'talks' with Iran..... . .was because they KNOW, that Iran will NOT participate in an honorable way, and they wanted THE WHOLE WORLD TO SEE, that Iran is not interested in Peace..... ..only 'obstructionism' ????????
It's barely been a day and a half... . ..and already people are showing how little they really pay attention to the actual report, and the Worldwide PUBLIC News Conference !!
What do you think ???
2006-12-08 00:45:58 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think you are a very intelligent, well read, informed individual. I love your thoughtful questions.
I can't answer your question, since I haven't been reading or watching that much news lately. (I know I should, since I like answering questions in the political section of YA and I will soon I promise.)
2006-12-08 00:56:53 · answer #1 · answered by Mikira 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You have a good point, but it seems like the whole world will do anything to avoid confronting Iran, no matter how obvious the facts are. Look at how their nuclear ambitions are being dealt with by China, Russia and Europe.
2006-12-08 01:08:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Wow! It took a whole committee to figure that out.
I saw that Iran would not do anything honorably six months ago.
they could have saved a lot of time and asked me.
As for the report itself like anything done by committee it is
full of what they believe the public wants to hear, nothing more.
Thank you very much, while you're up!!!!
2006-12-08 00:54:21 · answer #3 · answered by producer_vortex 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes and Iran is a major threat to the entire Middle East. I agree
2006-12-08 00:53:32 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I guess people in Government didn't even know this because two politician we both very anti any talks with Iran. Liberman being one of the two.Did you know this?
2006-12-08 01:22:11 · answer #5 · answered by wondermom 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree. Most of the people who are expressing strong opinions on the report haven't even read it. I'm withholding judgment until I do get to read it, probably this weekend.
2006-12-08 00:54:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
We could have told them that. And we could have told them that the liberals would exploit their report.
The report should have been kept simple: Iran is bad for Iraq.
2006-12-08 00:56:24 · answer #7 · answered by ? 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
People who want this to be a failure are Bush's 30 percenters.
2006-12-09 00:00:35 · answer #8 · answered by martino 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iran has been the one trying to get talks on the table. America has been incredibly dishonorable and dishonest about this.
2006-12-08 00:54:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋