after all he was the one that said we dont talk with terrorist.
2007-03-07 09:26:29 · 17 answers · asked by paul 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I asked this earlier and it got deleted. I think this makes him more of a flip flopper than kerry. but i am sure the cons wont see it that way.
2007-03-07 09:28:03 · answer #1 · answered by sydb1967 6 · 1⤊ 7⤋
No. That would be a mistake to say he flip flops, on this issue. Iran is breaking International law, not Mr. Bush. Bush has always conteded that Iran should not own, or produce nuclear weapons, and is trying to find a peaceful way to ensure the terrorist nation of Iran, doesn't break their signed agreements to the U.N. or Law agreement, that Iran signed. The Liberals are the ones who want talk, that NEVER works, with terrorist peoples. He is trying to appease them, Liberals! They are the idiots who think we could have talked to Osama bin Laden! Anyhow, if Iran, and their nutcase leader don't listen to reason, we're going to war. Terrorists will NOT be allowed to have nuclear bombs. Bush will see to that! I pray God Hillary, or any Liberal will not be the next president, because they will cower to the terrorists, and will let Iran have nukes!
2007-03-07 17:37:59 · answer #2 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
No matter what the President does, count on liberals to twist it, get it wrong, and complain about it.
The meeting was called for by the Iraq government. The Iraqi prime minister invited Iran and Syria, as well as the US. The upcoming meeting is by, for and about Iraq's problems.
If the US refused to attend, you would lead the liberals bellyaching that the President refused the offer from his ally.
As long as you are anti Mr. Bush no matter what he says or does, no one can call you a flip flopper, can they?
2007-03-07 17:32:51 · answer #3 · answered by regerugged 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Bush had to have talks with Iran, because the Democrats have all surrendered to Ahmadinejad.
Democrats have surrendered to Everyone.
That's why the terrorists supported them in the last election.
2007-03-07 17:31:25 · answer #4 · answered by wolf 6 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Instead of posting questions, why don't you people just post statements that say I hate Bush no matter what he does. You want him to talk to Iran and when he does you slam him. I am glad that you said "too".
2007-03-07 17:32:23 · answer #5 · answered by ohbrother 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
You bashers scream about him having an itchy trigger finger and then when he uses diplomacy you rant about that too.
You can't have it both ways and you obviously aren't happy unless you can curse about our President at every opportunity.
The President's actual words when questioned about dealing with Iran,"All options are on the table."
2007-03-07 17:34:16 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
No, he is following one of the suggestions brought forth by the Iraq War Senate committee. I as a republican am not really happy about the decision to do so.
2007-03-07 17:31:05 · answer #7 · answered by Johnny Conservative 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Since the liberals have folded, he has to do something! I am not happy with this decision, I think the only conversation we should be having is from about 45,000 feet.
2007-03-07 17:33:54 · answer #8 · answered by Amer-I-Can 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Very funny. But, now that Achmedidjihad peed himself over the carrier groups in the Persian Gulf, is it any wonder they want to talk now?
2007-03-07 17:41:58 · answer #9 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Halliburton has been doing business with Iran since Cheyney was CEO
2007-03-07 17:29:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋