It's so obvious that diplomacy can work, if you send the right people.
Pelosi goes to the Middle East.
Immediate result:
1. The 15 British are to be released. Although I don't give her direct credit for this, maybe seeing the 'other diplomatic side' of America had something to do with it.
2. Israel sends a message to Syria (through her) that it's time to 'talk about peace'.
Condi, are you there?
2007-04-04 03:34:39 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Hey, point # 1 just gave haters a focus point and most of them ignored point # 2. the big news is that Syria welcomed dialog and Bush has flat out refused to talk one on one with them. The wind of change blow pretty hard in the middle east. remember when Iran was our friend and before that our enemy and before that our friend? Syria has also been an on again off again friend but past presidents have realized the value of diplomacy. It doesn't always work but it costs so little and can change so much. It's always worth trying but our current leader seems to have learned his history at Hitler U.
2007-04-04 03:59:54 · answer #1 · answered by Alan S 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Boy has the wool been pulled over your eyes! Your enemy gives no credit to women what so ever and the 15 British soldiers are being released because Tony Blair said to release them. George Bush said to release them.
Israel has been sending a message to Syria since 1948 begging for peace. They cry "Peace, Peace" and there is no peace. They give land back which belongs to them and given to them by Almighty God, all in the name of wanting peace.
If Pelosi or Condi divide Israel or cause Israel any grief what so ever, they will be the worst traitors to this country that ever lived. We are a freedom loving country and so is Israel. When God says "fury will come up in His face" toward those who come against Israel and we ignore the Word of God, God can do nothing but bring judgment on America. Only God can curse the country that God has blessed.
Hebrews 10:31
It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
2007-04-04 03:59:15 · answer #2 · answered by Jeancommunicates 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are correct - in some cases, diplomacy, compromise and negotiations can work. However, the reality is that there are cases where it simply won't work - but that should be determined only after all of the sincere efforts fail.
It didn't work for Jimmy Carter when the Iranians held American hostages and he tried peaceful means to get them released for almost fourteen months - and, obviously, diplomacy and appeasement didn't hold Hitler's armies back in WWII.
I strongly suspect that our battle group aircraft carriers off Iran's coast might have also had an impact in their decision making process.
2007-04-04 03:45:47 · answer #3 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I highly doubt that either of those can be attributed to Pelosi. She has had little to no involvement with the talks between Iran and Britain. While it is possible that Israel sent a message through he for peace with Syria, it is unlikely. Bush is a much more staunch supporter of Israel, and Israel has wanted to talk for a peaceful resolution with the other Middle Eastern states.
2007-04-04 03:41:22 · answer #4 · answered by Nicholas P 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
All this because Nancy Pelosi visited the Syrian president? Are you serious? Un-friggin-believable. Amazing to me that crack pots will say that 911 was an inside job carried out by the Bush administration, yet they honestly think that the woes of the middle east can be solved with one visit by a left wing radical in the form of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
2007-04-04 03:45:04 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Only God Almighty has the power to allow Bush to "get" any messages through that thick Neanderthal skull of his!
Remember his Campaign speech back in 2000 when he insisted that he was a Uniter - and in reality - hasn't done a dam thing about uniting the American People other than spend the last four years trying to sell his Idiotic Invasion of Iraq to us!
2007-04-04 03:48:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Who can tell, he's on vacation at the ranch. He left the day after he criticized Congress for adjourning.
But apparently Bush got some kind of message through to the Iranians. They are releasing the 15 British sailors, and the US may release the 5 Iranian diplomats it took captive in December.
2007-04-04 03:40:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
I am for all, both warrior and diplomatic, exchange to respect culture. The culture of theirs is abuse in most americans sight to woman and poor in their country, ought maybe we not condemn but simply discuss why we see it not as being the more manly and upright policy of a people to promote. I dont understand why people dont negotiate, if god comes, are you going to be on the side saying we wont negotiate with you or the side bowed to the good lord? I am for respect in america of the people, gangs and others, I dishearten over our corrupt policies and abuses of people.
2007-04-04 03:49:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You mean the message that all the Democrats want to sabatoge any chance of success in Iraq for their political gain??? That's the same thinly disguised message we've been hearing from the left since even before the invasion took place!
2007-04-04 03:45:25 · answer #9 · answered by bradxschuman 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
That is about as big a stretch as I've ever seen. I think the British had more to do with the release than San Fran Nan did.
2007-04-04 03:40:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋