[flower-buy]

What's so interesting? he understands what he needs to say if he wants to stand a chance of being elected.

[Karpattaisp]

I only disagree with him to the extent he advocates attacking Iran to prevent them from getting the bomb. That doesn't differentiate him from other mainstream US pols, though, does it? Otherwise, what he said seems spot on.

-Arrian

[SoorgoBardy]

Note that this article is from 2004, before he was elected to the Senate.

[Bugamerka]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
Just about everyone, except a few of the posters here, realize that a nuclear Iran is about the world's biggest nightmare right now. Such as China and Russia?

[Zmniubqr]

Originally posted by Arrian
A link to a non-reg req story about basically the same thing:

http://www.slate.com/id/2160745/

It discusses the positions of several prominent Dems, and points out there isn't much daylight, if any, between their positions and Bush's.

-Arrian thats where I got the link to the Trib story.

I agree it seems like a sensible position, not different from that of other dems, and not really very different from current Admin policy.

It does seem rather different from the position of some of Obamas more vocal supporters.

I do wonder if its the same as his current position.

[Yartonbler]

Originally posted by ixnay
Note that this article is from 2004, before he was elected to the Senate. Note it was from only three years ago.

We're told McCain is a flip-floper for taking different stands now then he did in 2000.

Is it being elected to the Senate that is magic?

[Plulpangepler]

If we could have prevented the Russians from getting the bomb, we should have.

[sleelverrex]

I do wonder if its the same as his current position.

Substantively, I think it is. He has been saying that we should bunker down on diplomacy but in the end, all options are on the table. Which is pretty different from the Admin's policy, which (at least until recently) doesn't believe in, you know, diplomacy...

[Mediconlinee]

"On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse. So I guess my instinct would be to err on not having those weapons in the possession of the ruling clerics of Iran. ... And I hope it doesn't get to that point. But realistically, as I watch how this thing has evolved, I'd be surprised if Iran blinked at this point."

I think this position may have changed somewhat. Or at least, I hope it has...

[JackieC]

Talking with them would be a good first step. In 2003, they came to us (through the Swiss) to negotiate on everything: their nuclear program, Hezbollah, Hamas, recognizing Israel, cooperation on Iraq, etc., etc. and Cheney rejected them out of hand (according to Powell's Chief of Staff at the time, Lawrence Wilkerson, among others).

As I said, the Admin doesn't believe in diplomacy (though the midterms may have shaken them up, given the change of heart wrt North Korea).

[k5wTvu9f]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
Just about everyone, except a few of the posters here, realize that a nuclear Iran is about the world's biggest nightmare right now.

I can't believe the UN will allow that to happen. But if they don't have the spine - the US and Israel won't allow it. Reports have Iran being in a position to produce their own nukes 10 years from now, so no, a nuclear Iran is most certainly not "the world's biggest nightmare right now." The Bush Administration rattling swords with and threatening to use nukes against a non-nuclear Iran is.

[blackjackblax]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Who have the Russians ever bombed? Does everyone else understand what my point was? I'm not going to explain it just for Sloww.

[mygalinasoo]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs


Reports have Iran being in a position to produce their own nukes 10 years from now, so no, a nuclear Iran is most certainly not "the world's biggest nightmare right now." The Bush Administration rattling swords with and threatening to use nukes against a non-nuclear Iran is. what rattling of swords? Theyre trying to restore order to Baghdad, which means cracking down on some of Teherans best buddies. At the same time we do that, its not unwise to show Iran we can back up our position should they decide to retaliate for that crackdown (Which crackdown has led to dramatic decreases in sectarian killings in Baghdad, BTW) So we send in another carrier. Thats all. And we let people know what the Iranians are doing in Iraq. Why should we continue to keep quiet about that.

And, I am afraid to say, its mainly the "saber-rattling" that has kept China and Russia supportive of the sanctions process, the process that Obama supports.

We should be seeing a second sanction resolution soon. Note that the first one, far from solidifying support for Ahmadinajad, seems to be weakening his support, and leading some Iranians to question the regimes attitude to the West.

[ambientambien]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


what rattling of swords? Theyre trying to restore order to Baghdad, which means cracking down on some of Teherans best buddies. At the same time we do that, its not unwise to show Iran we can back up our position should they decide to retaliate for that crackdown (Which crackdown has led to dramatic decreases in sectarian killings in Baghdad, BTW) So we send in another carrier. Thats all. And we let people know what the Iranians are doing in Iraq. Why should we continue to keep quiet about that.

And, I am afraid to say, its mainly the "saber-rattling" that has kept China and Russia supportive of the sanctions process, the process that Obama supports.

We should be seeing a second sanction resolution soon. Note that the first one, far from solidifying support for Ahmadinajad, seems to be weakening his support, and leading some Iranians to question the regimes attitude to the West. If you have to ask, then you don't have the remotest clue what you're talking about...

[JAMES PIETERSE]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Because then we might have been able to end that totalitarian regime decades earlier and saved tens of trillions of dollars wasted on Cold War defense spending.

Agreed about the defense spending, but how would a bomb-less USSR have ended decades earlier?

[TZtrDuso]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
Just about everyone, except a few of the posters here, realize that a nuclear Iran is about the world's biggest nightmare right now. That'll change the moment Musharraff (sp) is overthrown by Islamic radicals and a nuclear-armed Pakistan goes fundamentalist.

I so hope that *never* happens, although the price of that probably means we'll be bleeding troops and material along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border into the foreseeable future, thanks to that "peace" deal Musharraff (sp) made with the Taliban-esque population in that area (Waziristan, I think? Or is it the North-West Frontier Province?)

Gatekeeper

[JJoon077]

Now lets get back to the point raised by Rossner in the article Arrian linked to. Is Obama's position that we should talk to them even if they continue enrichment? I haven't read anything that explicitly says anything about the scenario besides the last quote in the article (the one I hope he has changed his mind on)...


North Korea was part of a multilateral diplo process, which is the approach theyve taken with Nkor for some time. Yes, and in the past the deal could very well have been scuttled. See the reaction by hardliners like Bolton. Supposedly, Powell didn't push hard on the Iran offer to give him room to maneuver wrt NK. Cheney can only take so much diplomacy before shooting people in the face...

They also used diplomacy with Libya.

They supported the EU3 talks with Iran,

You realize that I was being somewhat facetious when I wrote that Bush doesn't believe in diplomacy, right?

and Khalilzad talked with Iran wrt Iraq. Briefly. The talks were pretty quickly suspended...

[TubOppomo]

what rattling of swords? Supporting the MEK, Kurdish rebels, carrying out covert ops within Iran, going on and on about threats to bomb their nuclear facilities, etc.

I know you don't care too much for Sy Hersh, but check out his latest article. It's fascinating. It's about the redirection of support to sometimes unsavory Sunni groups to fight the Shia crescent...

[agrismhig]

Originally posted by Ramo

I do wonder if its the same as his current position.

Substantively, I think it is. He has been saying that we should bunker down on diplomacy but in the end, all options are on the table. Which is pretty different from the Admin's policy, which (at least until recently) doesn't believe in, you know, diplomacy... Look who's talking: U.S., Iran to meet

February 28, 2007
BY ROBERT BURNS
WASHINGTON -- In a diplomatic turnabout, the Bush administration will join an Iraq-sponsored ''neighbors meeting'' with Iran and Syria, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Tuesday.

It marked a change of approach by the United States, which has resisted calls by members of Congress and by a bipartisan Iraq review group to include Iran and Syria in talks designed to stabilize Iraq.

The administration said its decision to take part in the Iraq conference did not represent a change of heart, although the White House has accused both Iran and Syria of deadly meddling in the war. ''We've always been inclined to participate in an Iraqi-led conference,'' White House counselor Dan Bartlett said.

The administration in recent weeks has increased its criticism of Iran's role in Iraq, charging it with supplying technologies for the most lethal form of roadside bombs. The administration has accused Syria of harboring anti-Iraqi government forces and allowing weapons to cross its border.

Rice's announcement was welcomed by Democrats and Republicans alike.

''Today's announcement is a first step, but it is not enough on its own,'' said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. ''Our national security requires a robust diplomatic effort in the Middle East, and the Bush administration cannot again settle for mere half measures.''

A Rice spokesman said the meeting would not include formal negotiations on Iran's nuclear program, but he did not rule out informal discussions.

AP I still wonder what is the carrot and what is the stick?

[Rwujnezq]

Yep, just saw that. Like I was saying the midterms seem to have shaken them up.