I feel a bit sorry for her because she probably wanted to meet with the Iranians long before Pelosi and the two republicans met with the Syrians. So she announced today that she will do so. The last thing the administration needs at this point is for some other politician to beat them to the punch re Iran.
But the question remains. There appears to be so much vacillation going on - to bomb or not to bomb, etc.
Does the United States have any idea what they are going to do with regards to Iran?
(and please...let's keep it serious., "Flattening" or "bombing them" off the earth is no different than what the Israelis say Iran wants to do with them. I hope the answerers are on a far higher level than that way of thinking in their responses to this issue.)
2007-04-06 14:27:36 · 11 answers · asked by rare2findd 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Astute observation.
Rice probably wants to do something positive before she leaves office. Bush is keeping her on a leash.
Yet....Pelosi is making sure the Middle East knows someone within our government is willing to end the stalemate.
WE can't afford another war, unless we start the draft. China just knocked a satellite out of orbit with their new weapon, in case anyone forgot. And the US has depleted 4 out of 5 of our pre-positioned overseas stockpiles.
We are at risk on many fronts, and if anyone has any doubts, look at how we are using stop-loss, mistreating our wounded at Walter Reed, underachieving in the recruitment department, and utilizing the National Guard to do what originally was supposed to have been over and done with by now, according to the idiot Rumsfeld, backed by his chicken-hearted mentor and certifiably insane Cheney.
2007-04-06 14:37:50 · answer #1 · answered by Truth 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It is really sad that the Bush Administration won't use diplomacy until someone else goes to pave the way.
Flattening Iran is stupid as all it would do is start WWIII and if that happens none of us will be around to see the end of the war. It will create conditions just the opposite of global warming only worse. Nothing living today would survive.
2007-04-06 21:36:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
If someone doesn't talk to them we'll be invading.
And they are 10 years away from any real nuclear threat. It's not like Bush needs to move on this while he's in office, let someone else deal with Iran.
2007-04-06 21:31:59 · answer #3 · answered by Malthusian 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Did political or diplomatic talks produced good results in Iraq with Saddam Hussein? Has diplomatic talks produced peace in Israel? Speak softly, carry a big stick, and don't hesitate to use it when the opposite side do not listen.
2007-04-06 21:36:41 · answer #4 · answered by furrryyy 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
bombing is on the table... sure...
but the poor way the Iraq war was handled has soured many in the US to any military action, I'm afraid... even if it may be action that is needed...
war requires a certain level of trust in leadership... both in their leadership ability, and trusting that leaders will be honest... and I'm afraid Bush is very low in both points on most people's list...
so, I think action will be a tough sale for Bush... and may only hurt him and his party more... even if the action is needed... which I think, at the moment, is up for some debate...but in the future, I could easily see a need to strike them potentially
2007-04-06 21:35:48 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
There were already plans for meetings between the US and Iran. All the Pelosi's trip proved was how dumb she is. The Arabs are laughing their butts off at Her and Us for the mistakes she made. Rice will set them straight because she has the knowledge to deal with them. Pelosi only wanted press time.
2007-04-06 21:33:12 · answer #6 · answered by mr conservative 5 · 0⤊ 4⤋
She probably needs to go do damage control.
""..Ms. Pelosi not only misrepresented Israel's position but was virtually alone in failing to discern that Mr. Assad's words were mere propaganda."" -Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
2007-04-06 21:30:51 · answer #7 · answered by sociald 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Like who?? Who paved the way? Pelosi only made things harder for everybody.
2007-04-06 21:31:51 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
If she does it will be with the consent of the President.
Not in treasonous defiance of the Commander-in-Chief.
2007-04-06 21:32:28 · answer #9 · answered by Tom C 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Nobody, republicans or democrats should be meeting with terrorist nations. There is no negotiating with terrorists
2007-04-06 21:34:20 · answer #10 · answered by conservative for life 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋