How Many Of You Still Think Iran Is Willing To Negotiate ? . . . . . . . . . Better Check The News First?

Question

" Iran's Top Nuclear Negotiator Resigns ".. . . a current featured story on Yahoo News .
The story in part says . . . . .. . . . Larijani in many cases held a hardline view on the nuclear standoff between Iran and the West but was also considered to be a more moderate figure than Ahmadinejad within Iran's hardline camp. He was seen as more committed to a diplomatic solution over Iran's nuclear program while Ahmadinejad is seen as not favoring talks with the West.

Larijani's resignation was interpreted by many here as giving Ahmadinejad a free hand in dictating his views to the less experienced Jalili.

But here's a link to the entire story that you can read before anyone makes a fool of themselves by thinking Iran has any intention whatsoever of negotiating .
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071020/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_nuclear

Answer 1

Of course they have no intentions of negotiating...Ahmadinejad SAID that he intended to wipe Israel off the map and come after us next....take him at his word...he has the idea that creating a situation like that will lead to the appearance of the Am-om(sp)...their savior...funny how the description of the appearance of their savior in many ways reflects what the bible calls the appearance of the anti christ in Revelation...this man clearly intends to start a war...with or without nukes...and we had better take him at his word.

Answer 2

Iran is not a nation of the free. We know for certain that we may have to go through the diplomatic arena and at least try the negotiation process. But we know certainly, it would be like negotiating with Saddam Hussein all over again.....

John Bolton would probably know since he was Bush's point man as the article states prior to becoming the UN Ambassador.

Ahmadjinedad is definitely looking to gain power and control.
And because he was invited to Columbia he probably thinks he has made points in the U.S.

Answer 3

Here's a tidbit of information for you. Rupert Murdoch owns 175 newspaper publications throughout the U.S., owns Fox News, the Wall Street Journal and the Dow Jones.

He also owns either 20th Century Fox or Warner Brothers Studios. The one that say A News Media Corporation underneath the symbol.

Tell me, how much influence do you think he has over what is reported to the American public?

Here's another tidbit for you. I called my senators today and asked a simple question.

I asked, "Other than someone telling me Iran is this big threat to America, how about showing the American public verifiable proof that the Iranian Republican Guard is truly a terrorist organisation."

The answer I received was this--it's all classified because we don't want the enemy to know what we know.

How come all this sudden alarm over Iran being a threat to the U.S? Weren't they just as much a threat before President Bush took office? What makes them more of a threat now?

Come on, the Iranian National Guard is their army. That would be like saying our armed forces are terrorists.

We rushed into Iraq saying they had WMD's. They didn't. Now we're being told that Iran poses a nuclear threat to the U.S.

That was the first reason. Then, for the second reason, we're told their army is a terrorist group. And now third, we're told they are supplying arms and EPD's to terrorists in Iraq.

Sounds like all the U.S. is doing is trying to build a case for invading another soverign nation.

Tell me, if we are for promoting democracy, why do we still support Saudi Arabia? They are a monarchy. Why do we support Turkey? They are a dictatorship.

In regards to the Armenian Genocide, how would you feel if one your relatives were killed 50 years ago and just today they found the guilty party. Would you just let that person go free to walk the streets or would you want them to spend the rest of their days in prison with the chance of facing the death penalty for their crimes?

I think the real question is, shouldn't the U.S. be more patient in regards to Iran? Shouldn't the U.S. give more credible evidence to the American public so that we know that what they say is true?

No matter who leaked Valerie Plame's Identity, shouldn't that person be prosecuted to fullest extent of the law? Another question about that--do you honestly believe the White House will do such a thing?

The U.S. government wasn't very reasonable when it came to Iraq. Tell me, how can they be trusted when it comes to Iran?

If anyone can honestly answer that question, then I think I can give you a reasonable answer to the question that was asked of the person who posted this question.

Answer 4

here is how we negotiate with Iran and Turkey as well.

You surrender now or we will send you Iran to your 12th Imam and coated with pork so now 72 palaces and virgins.
Turkey: You wish to tell the USA what to do. We are going to send you back past the stone age when you lived in goat skin tents on the Gobi desert.
You kill Christians this is what you get.

Answer 5

by way of fact Clinton has precisely one way of coping with N.ok. financial business enterprise on it: They have been given missle technologies or another candy deal and it certainly WILL bring about greater of that form of concern. N.ok. purely have been given a extensive reward for taking captives and each "undesirable guy" interior the international is familiar with it. Carter easily BALKED the Iran rescue. Reagan did no longer negotiate, except you call "i'm gonna' kill you" negotiating. a hundred% of our bases are the place host countries want them. on each and every occasion we've talked of last one, the rustic they're IN has a tantrum. "Your" Heavenly Father has given us a pacesetter who loves purely our enemies and stated SO in his autobiography. you're unaware of even a single occasion the place peace has EVER been "negotiated."

Answer 6

Under the leadership of Ahmadinejad the talks will go no where and we will be pushed to the brink, we need to be committed to seeing this through if he continues this hard line and progress to a nuclear bomb.

Answer 7

Most people know except the left wing Liberal Democrats that you can't negotiate or have a talk with terrorists. Those Iranians are laughing behind Hillary's back to think she is going to have a "peace talk" with them!

Answer 8

Except for the fact that Ahmadinejad doesn't have the final say over the issue -- since in Iran, the President is not the chief executive, and doesn't make security-based decisions like this.

The Ayatolla makes the decisions -- and the Ayatolla has said that Iran is still open to negotiation.

Answer 9

Leap to conclusions much?

I'll continue to believe they'll allow inspections until I hear otherwise from a reliable source.

I don't consider your mere opinion a realiable source.

As the lover of Jon Stewart said, it's the UN's to deal with.

Our poor relations with Iran are more our fault than the Iranians. How would you feel about a powerful country forcing a brutal dictatorship on you for decades? Then, when you finally get rid of it, they call YOU evil?

Answer 10

Conservatives have known all along that negotiations would be fruitless with Iran. At least now the news is covering it...seems like lately the news has either been quiet or has proven the rights points a lot more lately.