foreign policy. What an absolute idiot!!!
Want to join in the fun? Click the logo to donate to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth!
Posted on 09/01/2004 10:56:47 PM PDT by F14 Pilot
IN AN INTERVIEW with the Washington Post published yesterday, Democratic vice-presidential nominee John Edwards promised that a Kerry administration would offer a "grand bargain" to the totalitarian theocracy in Iran. This "grand bargain" would allow the Islamic state to keep its nuclear power plants in exchange for a promise to give up the kind of nuclear fuel used to make bombs.
This is a dangerous proposal and should receive close scrutiny.
First, the Kerry team has apparently learned nothing from the disastrous deal the Clinton administration made with North Korea back in the 1990s. Edwards's proposal for a "grand bargain" with Iran is almost identical to the Clinton administration's 1994 Agreed Framework deal. In that earlier "bargain," North Korea promised to halt work on nuclear weapons in return for American assistance with "peaceful" nuclear programs. We now know that the North Korean government lied all along and used the agreement to proceed with its nuclear weapons programs.
But the Kerry team is undeterred by this record of failure. In fact, Edwards's proposal is of a piece with Kerry's generally soft approach to dangerous regimes like the one in Teheran. Back in March, Kerry told the Council on Foreign Relations that he wanted to carry out a "non-confrontational" policy toward Iran that emphasizes areas of "mutual interest."
Being "non-confrontational" with Iran apparently means not raising troubling matters, such as Iran's ongoing support for terrorism. In outlining his proposed "grand bargain" with the Iranian government, Edwards completely ignored the fact that a number of senior ranking al Qaeda officials now live and operate in Iran under the Iranian government's protection. Richard Clarke has stated that he regards the connection between Iran and al Qaeda as very dangerous. Yet John Edwards does not insist that his "grand bargain" must include a promise by Iran to cut off all ties with al Qaeda and to turn over those al Qaeda operatives on Iranian soil. Undoubtedly, this is all part of Kerry's and Edwards's strategy for waging a "more sensitive" war on global terrorism.
Kerry and Edwards believe the failed policies of the 1990s remain suitable to the post-September 11 era. We doubt a majority of Americans will agree.
Tom Donnelly is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
ping!
We can pay now or later. Kerry is suggesting we pay twice, now AND then.
"allow the Islamic state to keep its nuclear power plants in exchange for a promise to give up the kind of nuclear fuel used to make bombs."
And it only costs the American tax payers 100 billion dollars. And a guarantee from the American government not to invade Iran.
Yipppeeeee!
Yep he wants to settle out of court.
Does this IDIOT really believe Iran wants nuclear energy? He can't be that stupid can he?
Imagine...An ambulance chasing lawyer, already making dumb
foreign policy. What an absolute idiot!!!
This new thesis by Kerry and Edweirds should scare the hell out of every conservative, moderate, independent and any democrat who has burned out their brain cells.
Lets check his bank accounts. It sounds like the same sweetheart deal that Clinton gave the N. Koreans. Maybe Kerry thinks that Iran will just go away for a few years.
How's this for a deal. Iran gets rid of all its nuclear bomb making facilities , allow for inspections anytime anywhere or we give it detonated nuclear weapons until they glow and then we shoot them in the dark.
This sounds similiar to Kerry's grand bargain with Daniel Ortega and the Sandanistas.
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1073263/posts
Kerry is a lightweight negotiator. I don't think Iranian mullahs will be impressed by Edwards boyish charm the way smalltown jurors appear to be.
Kerry is showing that he's truly a paleo-Leftist if he still advocates offering dangerous concessions in exchange for promises from a dictatorship.
You don't allow nuclear weapons to a government that doesn't mind killing it's own people to stay in power.
If they'll kill their own by the thousands, would Kerry really feel comfortable with the Mullahs having the ability to kill us by the MILLIONS?
On the heels of the Kerry email to Teheran promising to repair the damage the Bush Administration has caused since 911.
I heard Clinton on the radio last week stating they the agreement with North Korea on his watch had derailed their nuclear program! He's still taking CREDIT.
Anyone reading this forum needs to understand that the left still thinks Carter is the best thing since sliced bread. Remember, Carter got the Nobel Peace Prize during the same period when we finally called the North Koreans for welshing.
Folks, there was "nothing to learn" if you live in an alternate reality.
"the left still thinks Carter is the best thing since sliced bread"
Exactly. And that sums up an awful lot. Thye're still in denial or blind to the long lasting problems he's cost us, as they are with the long lasting problems Clinton has cost us. We will be dealing with, haunted by and paying for their presidencies, for years to come.
The damage has been enormous.
It would. Until the next Republican administration.
JFK/Johnson, Carter, Clinton -- why do we always have to clean up Dem messes?
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.
