Constructive engagement

[ACPlayer]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[MMMMMM]

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]

[ 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]

Iranians, like most Arabs,


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

[MMMMMM]

You raise some good points.

With Iran's Parliament shouting "Death To America" as they approved a bill to enrich uranium, I don't think it would be too bad a thing to see Iran's entire Parliament flattened in a pre-emptive strike, however. Maybe the young Iranians who are pro-democracy would understand, and put their pride aside. At any rate I view the Iranian Parliament's outburst and obvious intent as grounds for the pre-emptive deposing of a backwards and dangerous regime.

"COUNTDOWN TO ELECTION DAY
Iran's threats discredit Kerry nuke policy
Parliament shouts 'Death to America' in vote to enrich unranium
Posted: November 2, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Art Moore
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

On the eve of the U.S. presidential election, Sen. John Kerry's campaign continues to advocate normalizing relations and providing nuclear fuel to Tehran's radical mullah-led regime despite the Iranian parliament's defiant, anti-American vote to proceed with uranium enrichment, a key process in development of atomic weapons.

Shouting "Death to America," and "Death to Israel," Iranian lawmakers decided unanimously Sunday to back the outline of a bill that would require the Islamic government to resume uranium enrichment.

An activist in the Iranian democracy movement believes the American mainstream media is ignoring the impact the parliament's message has on today's U.S. presidential election.

"The actions of those calling themselves representatives of the Iranian people are the best proof that John Kerry is totally disconnected from real politics," said Aryo Pirouznia, leader of the Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran.

SPONSORED LINKS

$150,000 Mortgage for Under $690/Month
Mortgage rates are at record lows. Save $1000s on your mortgage payment. Free quotes.
www.lowermybills.com

Long Lasting Chest Congestion Relief
Order Mucinex Expectorants online through the official site. Learn how Mucinex tablets provide fast acting relief. Visit the site for local flu conditions.
www.mucinex.com

Kerry has been insisting that as president he would provide Tehran with nuclear fuel as long as it is used only for peaceful purposes -- a position similar to Britain, France and Germany's offer to provide nuclear technology in exchange for assurances Iran would stop enriching uranium indefinitely.

After the defiant parliamentary vote, the Associated Press reported Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Hossein Mousavian, said a compromise could still be reached with European negotiators to avert the risk of U.N. sanctions. But during discussion of the bill in the Iranian parliament, Mousavian said any agreement would not include indefinite suspension of unranium enrichment.

Pirouznia warned that Tehran's posturing "is a perfect game" played by a "masterful" regime that is only trying to buy time in pursuit of its ultimate aim, "bringing the Islamic republic to the four corners of the world at the expense of the Iranian people."

"And now the European Union is a witness to how it's been lured," Pirouznia said. "While Tehran negotiates abroad, inside they gather their zealots, their security forces and their so-called parliament to make it appear that the West is the bad guys."

Iran, he points out, is allied with Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida network, through Tehran's sponsored terrorist group, Hezbollah.

The Kerry campaign did not respond to WorldNetDaily's request for comment.

WND has previously reported that Tehran already is engaged in an ambitious program to develop nuclear weapons to compliment its recently attained ballistic missile program, capable of reaching Israel. According to the latest intelligence reports, Iran has decided at the highest levels of government to produce a bomb within the next few months.

A senior Iranian official recently said the country was nearing completion of a uranium-conversion facility in Isfahan. Tehran said it intends to convert 37 tons of uranium ore into uranium hexafluoride, sufficient to produce five nuclear bombs. Last month, the IAEA said it believed the uranium conversion facility at Isfahan was operating on an experimental basis.

Iran insists in its communication with the West that the uranium enrichment is only for the purpose of producing electricity.

'Same blind alley'

Responding to the report on the Iranian parliament's defiance, Jerome Corsi, a consultant to Pirouznia, contended the mainstream press is "hiding the issue that Senator Kerry seems perfectly willing to go along with [Tehran's] plan and be led down the same blind alley that President Clinton followed when he gave nuclear fuel to North Korea."

North Korea has admitted it developed nuclear weapons despite agreements in the early 1990s.

"How can Kerry have on his website a position favorable to this Iranian theocracy when its legislators vote to enrich uranium as they scream "Death to America and Death to Israel," asked Corsi, who also has challenged Kerry's Vietnam record as co-author of the best-seller "Unfit for Command."

Corsi believes mainstream media outlets favorable to Kerry are attempting to whitewash the senator's policy.

"It's clear that Tehran is going to push for nuclear weapons regardless of how they couch the story," he said. "Anybody who doesn't see that is painfully naive."

Referring to the U.S. vote, Corsi said the story "certainly would be frightening to all supporters of Israel, Christian as well as Jewish, and to those who believe Israeli democracy is critical to U.S. national security interests."

The Bush administration is pushing for Tehran to give up its uranium enrichment prior to a Nov. 25 meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency, warning the U.S. will refer the case to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions if Iran does not comply.

Tehran, said Corsi, "would like to go into that meeting with a John Kerry victory in their back pocket."

"They know they could bully the IAEA and other nations with this below-the-surface communication that Iran intends to have full recognition as a legitimate regime, and as such, intends to pursue their decision to develop nuclear weapons as a matter of international right," Corsi said.

Also ignored, he contended, is the extent to which the "pro-mullah lobby" in the U.S. is influencing the Kerry campaign's policy positions.

Under oath last month, Kerry's chief Iranian-American fund-raiser repudiated the presidential candidate's stance of accommodation toward Tehran, declaring the Islamic regime should not be trusted with nuclear materials.

Hassan Nemazee, a former board member of a pro-Tehran lobby, said if the Democratic nominee had asked him his view of the Iranian regime, he would have said it should be trusted with no other intention than to build nuclear weapons.

The deposition was delivered in a $10 million defamation lawsuit against Pirouznia, charging the activist with defamation of character for accusing him of being an Iranian government agent. In a countersuit, Pirouznia contends that supporters of the cleric-led regime are funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Kerry campaign. "

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=41229

[Cpt Spaulding]

[ 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....