Fine, just remember you said that the next time you want to bring up anything UN related.

Were there no UN resolutions individual countries sanctions by the US and her allies would still exist, and we would still be in a situation Iran was still pursuing nuclear capabilities against the will of the global community. They would still be doing what they are and I would still be asking why anyone thinks carrots will help a situation in which the use of sticks has already proven to be fruitless. What could we possibly give Iran to make them stop enriching uranium and to prevent them from eventually building nuclear weapons?

If we removed all the Jews and gave them Israel they still will do what they're doing.

__________________

What do you want to do? Attack? Of coarse not. So what do you lose by giving the guy a chance? Nothing. What do we gain? World prestige and support for making the effort. Then we gain allies. Thats how you set them up. I still say you guys remind me of the character on the movie Mystery Men. Ben stiller thinks he is a super hero. But his only power is rage. And thats his reaction to every issue. He attacks without thinking. Its comical because he is one dimensional. Get it?

I'm capable of answering questions, so you don't really have to do so for me.

I don't have any information that would tell me we should attack anything at the moment. If at some point someone does have that information I would hope they would weigh the pros and cons of doing so and not just sit behind the desk and 'hope'.

Really? I think we gain egg on our face when the world discovers while we were talking and making concessions Iran was deceiving us all along. Being 'played' doesn't win you friends and prestige, it exposes you as naive and gullible. After Iran goes nuclear all the while we were making concessions (read: giving them stuff), other countries will come to understand that the US is 'easy', and we will end up with more potential suitors than you could ever imagine.

__________________

So, you don't think we should attack, nor do you think we should talk to them. So, your proposal is to do nothing? If so, we wait and see, and then what?

No...It's not "attack or do nothing"...

The EU3 has had tried to work with Iran for the last 5 years (failing miserably)...

The first step was Bush's economic sanctions...American banks have been barred from deling with Iran, cutting off a vital part o their money supply...That's not a "wait 3 months and see what happens" scenario...As time goes by, that hurts Iran more and more...

Also, the UN security council has also placed Iran on sanctions, but not as much as the US would like, and Bush has been pushing the UN for much greater sanctions...

The object is to ISOLASTE Iran from doing business with the rest of the world...If ALL countries would do this, Iran wouldn't be able to hang in the global community considering they wouldn't be able to do business with anyone...

That's the plan...and as much as Iran puts up good front (and the world sucks it up as believable), they really ARE getting hurt...Their economy is so bad right now that Iran recently has to have gas lines like America did back in the 70s with carter...Iran has all of that oil but hardly any refineries...That means they have to export their oil to have it refined and returned to them....

If A-hole countries like Russia and China would jump on board with sanctions and blocking refinery efforts, we could shut Iran in a few years and they'd be forced to comply...

It's NOT was Bush is doing or what the UN is doing or what the EU3 is doing...The plan is already in place...It's countries that are NOT on board with this that keeps Iran surviving...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

I don't think I would worry about the egg on our faces. Whats more embarrassing then getting bogged down in a country that had no WMD's I think we already have an omelette on there.

He was editor of the law journal and so was Laura Ingrham.

It is what he has learned and what he believes that is dangerous. How he uses that intelligence he has.

Funny? I suggest you take it very serious and with the utmost concern. HIS understanding of the enemy will dictate HIS actions in the face of them. The decisions he makes will be based on that understanding. And so far he hasn't shown a very informed or reasoned understanding of them other then they will bow to the shear power of his personality and do whatever he simply requests.

It's exactly what he will do.


"During a Democratic presidential debate in July, Obama said he would be willing to meet without precondition in the first year of his presidency with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea."
FOXNews.com - Clinton Reverses, Says She Would Negotiate with Iran's Leaders - You Decide 2008


ROFL it is one of THE major issues of the campaign, one Obama is willingly discussing in pubic and to say he cannot be questioned on it, what he says is above any debate we must just accept it and keep our mouth shuts is pure folly.

Well you said it not me.
Post the specific statement with a link to it.

Oh I hate that. Breaking everything down to little snip its. We are kicking a dead horse. You assume the worst. And I don't really give a crap. I think any of them are miles ahead of Bush. I have decided that I like Obama better then McCain. But you can be happy about one thing. If Obama wins and things get worse you can say you were right. And I know that it has been a bit of a dry spell for the right being right on something.

OMG, that is so old of an argument, and totally irrelevant.

You failed to answer any of my points, which leads me to to believe you are incapable of doint so. I could regurgitate DEM talking points at the very least, so I maintain a modicum of respect for your not having done so.

If you think the only justification for removing Saddam Hussein from power was WMD's you're clueless. The rightful democratic government hanged him for his atrocities, or did you miss that?

I can only assume based on your comments that you would have preferred a strong-armed genocidal dictator over a populace democratically elected willing to fight for their rights.

That's despicable.

__________________

It makes it easier to respond to your specific points as oppose to your method of just pasting my entire post at the top. No need to do that I can go and read my post in toto, it makes it harder for me to know exactly what you are responding to, or in this case avoiding.

No this horse is very much alive you just seem unwilling to ride it and acutally discuss the issue at hand.