Constructive engagement

ACPlayer · #1 01-14-2005, 01:30 AM

Oil deal Haliburton and Iran

[ QUOTE ]
The latest instance of the "engage Iran" school is a US advocacy group dominated by prominent figures of the Republican Party, the Committee on the Present Danger (CPD), which, in a paper titled "Iran: A New Approach" calls for the re-opening of diplomatic relations with Tehran, bringing to an end the 25-year estrangement in US-Iran relations following the hostage crisis in the American embassy in Tehran in 1979, shortly after the Islamic revolution of that year. CPD is co-chaired by the former US secretary of state George Schultz and former director of the Central Intelligence Agency James Woolsey. Indeed, the Bush administration has all but piped down its rhetoric over Iran lately.

But Iran seems to be seeking some transparency over the Bush administration's intentions. Certainly, the deal over South Pars will be profitable for Texas-based Halliburton. But Iranians do not want to be treated as a one-night stand by the Bush administration either. They would seek a more predictable, enduring, mutually beneficial relationship with the US - indeed, they always wanted it.

Washington's reaction to the media "leak" in Tehran two days back will be keenly watched. The (multi) million-dollar question is whether the Halliburton deal constitutes the first meaningful step of a concerted American diplomatic effort to engage Iran constructively. The initial reaction among the American strategic community is that there's some kind of a "dance" going on here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Far better that stupid axis of evil rhetoric.

Cpt Spaulding · #2 01-14-2005, 01:45 AM

Ok...Name a few other companies that can do the work.....Not very many are there...I do not support this war or administration don't get me wrong. I just think there are far more important issues out there to deal with. This is no worse than Clinton pardoning Mark Rich for the contributions to his library. Dishonesty owns our government no matter who is in office.. Pointing it out is getting old...We need to do something about it...

ACPlayer · #3 01-14-2005, 01:59 AM

Do you like the idea of us getting engaged commercially with Iran? I do, I think it is a positive step and want much more. See title: constructive engagement.

Cant figure out what you mean by this strange post.

Cpt Spaulding · #4 01-14-2005, 02:17 AM

Sorry misread your post, had several things going on when I read it....Maybe I should turn off the TV next time and actually read the post instead of assuming what it says...

I think we should be more worried about Iran's Nuclear program rather than putting up a couple strip malls and a taco bell. Sure it would be a good step in the right direction. I think it is just a premature step at this point.

ACPlayer · #5 01-14-2005, 08:46 AM

It is called a "dance". Give a little, get a little then a little more. Baby steps with the eye on the big picture.

Call them the axis of evil they will do everything they can to defend themselves from the underlying threat of attack. A little smile, a little kiss, a glass of wine, a nice meal and then a nice healthy marriage.

Cpt Spaulding · #6 01-14-2005, 06:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It is called a "dance". Give a little, get a little then a little more. Baby steps with the eye on the big picture.

Call them the axis of evil they will do everything they can to defend themselves from the underlying threat of attack. A little smile, a little kiss, a glass of wine, a nice meal and then a nice healthy marriage.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand the catch more bees with honey theory. One flaw with that though...The bee might sting you when you least expect it. We have helped people in the past only for them to turn on us. We are forcing way of life on these people and no matter how nicely we dance our system will not take. Think about how you would feel if some country invaded us and tried to install a monarchy. We would not lay down and take it up the ass. I agree these people need help, but we should feed them with a stick for awhile....

MMMMMM · #7 01-14-2005, 09:37 AM

Trying to engage Iran while the mullahs are in power is like trying to have sex while wearing a full suit of armor.

First get rid of the mullahs; then engage the Iranian people who want to be engaged.

The people of Iran are pretty young, educated, and progressive (at least for the Middle East); and most of them hate the mullahs' rule but are powerless against it. The mullahs beat them down whenever they try to demonstrate. The iron-fisted ruling mullahs of Iran are Dark Age morons (who are also corrupt and who steal billions from the country). Take them out; they, not the Iranian people, are a significant part of the axis of evil.

Regime change is a good thing in some cases. Drop a few bombs on the mullah's next grand assembly. This approach will also take out the mullah's nuclear program. Free the Iranian people from their Dark Age tyrants. Then you can have all the "constructive engagement" you want--with the people of Iran, not with some Dark Age madmen.

PhatTBoll · #8 01-14-2005, 04:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Trying to engage Iran while the mullahs are in power is like trying to have sex while wearing a full suit of armor.

First get rid of the mullahs; then engage the Iranian people who want to be engaged.

The people of Iran are pretty young, educated, and progressive (at least for the Middle East); and most of them hate the mullahs' rule but are powerless against it. The mullahs beat them down whenever they try to demonstrate. The iron-fisted ruling mullahs of Iran are Dark Age morons (who are also corrupt and who steal billions from the country).

[/ QUOTE ]

All too true.

[ QUOTE ]
Take them out; they, not the Iranian people, are a significant part of the axis of evil.

Regime change is a good thing in some cases. Drop a few bombs on the mullah's next grand assembly. This approach will also take out the mullah's nuclear program. Free the Iranian people from their Dark Age tyrants. Then you can have all the "constructive engagement" you want--with the people of Iran, not with some Dark Age madmen.

[/ QUOTE ]

What I've read is that while the young, pro-America base in Iran would love to see the mullahs leave power, they don't want it to be America who takes them out. Iranians, like most Arabs, have a lot of pride. They still feel like they can change from within, rather than have a massive world power with its own agenda invading their country. It will be interesting to see how this administration and future ones balance the perceived threat to American security with the Iranian people's desire to keep their struggle internal.

zaxx19 · #9 01-14-2005, 05:00 PM

Iranians, like most Arabs,

Hmm....I didnt know most Iranians were Arabs, I was under the impression they were Persian and Turkoman.

PhatTBoll · #10 01-14-2005, 06:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Hmm....I didnt know most Iranians were Arabs, I was under the impression they were Persian and Turkoman.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know this. You interpreted my wording incorrectly. What I meant to say was Iranians, like Arabs, are very prideful. However, some Arabs don't have much pride, like the ones who kill innocent citizens waiting in line to become police officers. So I said most Arabs. I'm sorry this disturbed you so much.