Skip to comments.
A Talk at Lunch That Shifted the Stance on Iran
NYT ^
| 6/4/06
| HELENE COOPER and DAVID E. SANGER
Posted on 06/03/2006 11:03:37 AM PDT by bnelson44
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-37 last
To: Founding Father
President Bush does not consider the Mexican bus boy climbing the wall (in the picture ypou posted) as dangerous to our national security as the islamic terrorist regime in Iran having a nuclear weapon. Please do not turn this thread into an illegal immigration one.
21
posted on
06/03/2006 12:02:28 PM PDT
by
jveritas
(Support The Commander in Chief in Times of War)
To: jveritas
If Iran does not stop in six months or so building their nuclear weapon program, they will be bombed by us back to the seventh century where they like to be. Iran will not have the nuclear bomb as long as GW Bush is President.What's the name of your doctor? I want the same meds you're on. LOL
22
posted on
06/03/2006 12:02:40 PM PDT
by
Cobra64
(All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
To: bnelson44
A Talk at Lunch That Shifted the Stance on Iran What'd she say? "Hey, we've already negotiated with Abu Mazen, the financier of the '72 Munich Massacre. What's a few mad mullahs next to that?"
To: bnelson44
The United States blinks.
North Korea Redux? But more dangerous with catastrophic consequences. I doubt we can blame Clinton this time?
Bush is being played. By Iran. By the Europeans. By Rice(State).
If anyone reading this believes that any type of negotiations will stop Iran's nuclear program- respond.
If anyone believes France and Russia, and others, will not try to block us even after an attempt at negotiations fail- respond.
If you believe negotiations will amount to nothing and at the dead end the International community will still be against us pursing any serious action against Iran- you're wiser then the President.
24
posted on
06/03/2006 12:08:05 PM PDT
by
Sabramerican
(Bandar Bush in 08: Continue the Legacy)
To: Pox
I like that the ball is now in Iran's court.
Seemingly no one on this forum is appeasable on any front at all.
25
posted on
06/03/2006 12:10:43 PM PDT
by
OldFriend
(I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag.....and My Heart to the Soldier Who Protects It.)
To: jveritas
Please do not turn this thread into an illegal immigration one. Like so many others you have missed the point completely. That "mexican bus boy" you refer to could easily be (and maybe has been) an islamic terrorist.
It is a joke (and dishonors those who serve and defend) to fight terrorists around the world (which I agree needs to be done) and leave your borders undefended thus allowing those same terrorists to walk right in.
An illegal immigration issue, no sir, this is a security issue.
26
posted on
06/03/2006 12:11:25 PM PDT
by
Founding Father
(I'm building a fence near Palominas, Az. along with my "vigilante" friends.)
To: Founding Father
But the thread is about Iran
27
posted on
06/03/2006 12:18:32 PM PDT
by
bnelson44
(Proud parent of a tanker! (Charlie Mike, son))
To: Cobra64
28
posted on
06/03/2006 12:21:47 PM PDT
by
OKIEDOC
(There's nothing like hearing someone say thank you for your help.)
To: Sabramerican
the president knows that negotiations will not work on iran. the point of negotiations is to prove to the rest of the world how crazy this guy is. that way we can get some europeans to go in with us and take a few bullets for us.
29
posted on
06/03/2006 1:19:53 PM PDT
by
brannon
(now hold on there son....)
To: brannon
2007 won't be a good year for the Iranian mullahs.
Mark it....Bush will NOT leave the Presidency without blocking Iran's path to nuclear weapons.
To: Pox
Don't fall for this NYTimes smear piece..."Oh whoa is us"...please...
How about an Israeli take on what's going on?
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1170
----------
"The US secretary of state said the US was willing to join European allies in direct talks with Iran - provided Iran abandoned its uranium enrichment program. Tehran predictably dismissed the offer as propaganda and presenting no new and rational solution to Irans nuclear case. The enrichment program would go on, declared Irans foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki.
Rice had her answers ready for that response. Anticipating an Iranian brush-off, the US has already begun implementing its own package of sanctions. As Rice put it, Were prepared to go either way.
She also made it clear that the United States would not swear off ever using military action.
The two parties are therefore closer to a collision course first financial and, further down the road, military - than to dialogue. "
-----------
This is nothing more than the Times try to color the administration.
31
posted on
06/03/2006 4:53:34 PM PDT
by
Khepri
(ETHEREAL TAGLINE)
To: bnelson44
"Mr. Bush left open the option of scuttling the entire idea until early Wednesday morning, three senior officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were describing internal debates in the White House."
Another leak. Does anyone besides me have a problem with this?
32
posted on
06/03/2006 5:10:27 PM PDT
by
Excellence
(Since November 6, 1998)
To: bnelson44
Instead of total war, I really wish we could find a way to get rid of the hate-mongers who are instilling fear in the Iranian people. That would take care of 99% of the problem right there. The people of Iran like a lot of Western things, but they're very nationalistic and obtaining the bomb and being (in their minds) on an equal footing militarily with the rest of the world is important to them because their "religous" leaders and others have convinced them that obtaining the bomb is the only way for them to protect themselves from the "evil" West.
33
posted on
06/03/2006 6:02:07 PM PDT
by
NinoFan
To: jveritas
Just relax both of you
Thank you. This is something that needs to be said more often around here.
34
posted on
06/03/2006 8:54:12 PM PDT
by
Valin
(http://www.irey.com/)
To: jveritas
Typical people like him... its "his topic or no topic"
I'm really starting to LOATHE a few nicks on here.
35
posted on
06/04/2006 8:38:50 AM PDT
by
FreedomNeocon
(Success is not final; Failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts -- Churchill)
To: FreedomNeocon
They can't stand any thread not being about immigration.
If its on WoT, they turn it into immigration. If its a spending bill, they turn it into immigration. If its a Judaical debate, they turn it into immigration. If its a media piece, they turn it into immigration. If its a live thread, they turn it into immigration.
Is getting REAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLY old.
36
posted on
06/04/2006 8:40:20 AM PDT
by
FreedomNeocon
(Success is not final; Failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts -- Churchill)
To: FreedomNeocon
I do not think they are learning. FR moderators have banned so many of them including their LEADER and they still do not get it.
37
posted on
06/04/2006 12:38:38 PM PDT
by
jveritas
(Support The Commander in Chief in Times of War)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-37 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson