I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me…

NO.

Basically terrorists want war. And America is giving it to them with the Iraq War. If we withdraw, might we be eliminating their motivation to fight?

It does not take an Einstein to realize that Iran’s approach is to support the Obama campaign and hope all forget history about how to deal with thugs, terrorist and rouge states. Treating them with formal state occassions will not make us their pals…they see this as totoal waekness…total paper tiger at best and Obama represents all that this term rpepresents.

I am not wise just that I was present thru the cold war and excercised with nuclear strikes and chemical weapons usage in myy time in the military. In addition, saww directly what occurred under the shaw of iran and what happened when carter was president and the total mess his indecesiveness created for all americans in the military as well as the economy. I have seen first hand how our enemies were empowered by his weakness which Obama represents totally.

Obama would be the worst possible choice for the current events with the war on terror. Under his guidance there is no question this would be brought to an end. GOD HELP AMERICA

Some very wise comments on your part. Unfortunately, I don’t think a lot of people that are making comments here will really comprehend your point. You are right … why would these guys in Iran want to negotiate? They would love to talk with little Barak, and talk, and talk. And while little Barak talks, they will continue to create havoc in whatever way they can.

Maybe, no not maybe, we really need to send little Barak Husssein Obama over to Israel so that they can educate him on the art of negotiations with Terrorists so he can finally grow up. Israel could use their recent negotiation with Syria as an example for little Obama. Barak, it’s really quite simple … you load up the planes with the appropriate munitions, load in target coordinates, and then blow the nuclear facility up. Simple, to the point, effective, and everyone gets the message … negotiations completed. Think you can comprehend that little Barak?

the dems have already offered them what they want…leave the middle east so what else do they want…leave the jewish state isolated or else??? You offer concessions when you know it is not the right thing to do and that is called appeasement. But the dems have already surrendered
without one shot fired or concession on their part. So give me a good reason why they would change their behavior…they already got what they wanted.

“If George Bush and John McCain have a problem with direct diplomacy, led by the president of the United States, then they can explain why they have a problem with John F. Kennedy because that’s what he did with [Soviet leader Nikita] Khrushchev, or Ronald Reagan, ’cause that’s what he did with [Soviet leader Mikhail] Gorbachev, or Richard Nixon ’cause that’s what they did with [Chinese leader Mao Tse-tung],” Obama said in Roseburg, Ore. “That’s exactly the kind of diplomacy we need to keep us safe.”
==============================================================
Sigh…

Kennedy…yes he talked to Kruschev but Kruschev later said that he perceived Kennedy as weak in that meeting and it gave him encouragement for placing missiles in Cuba. Also, we had had many talks and agreements with the Soviets prior to that meeting.

Reagan…he had refused to meet with other Soviet leaders. And he only met with Gorbachev after the Soviets had shown a willingness to cooperate and had displayed more liberalism in their country. And again we had a history of agreements with the Soviets prior to those meetings.

Nixon…bad example. He and Kissinger had given lots of concessions to the Communists concerning Taiwan and Vietnam so they could display this achievement.

Of course he is an Obama supporter

He is on the “Bush 3rd term….Obama is the greatest” crowd