Is it appeasement to talk to unsavory regimes?

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

But that isn't what you neocons have done. Sending an overwhelming force into Afghanistan,

You mean like the Soviets? Good call. :roll:

declaring martial law,

I prefer Democracy.

and wiping out the Taliban and al-Qaeda would've been "killing the crocodile."

The Taliban are a minimal threat.

Sending a force into Iraq - that was too small to pacify the country, but large enough to provoke more terrorism - was "kicking the crocodile." In fact, it was kicking a crocodile that was previously asleep and wasn't even a threat to you until you woke it up.

I have provided mounds of evidence that Saddam was a threat to the United States and was intent on attacking U.S. interests including one plan to train volunteer suicide bombers to attack the U.S..

 

[Kandahar]

You mean like the Soviets? Good call. :roll:

Only an idiot would conclude that invading a country with fewer troops would produce a better result than invading a country with more troops, all other things being equal. Are you suggesting that the reason that the Soviets failed was because they had TOO MANY troops in Afghanistan?

I prefer Democracy.

And I prefer to have millions of dollars and lots of hot women.

Afghanistan doesn't have the luxury of democracy. It is a war-torn failed state, and one of the poorest countries in the world. It can barely feed its people.

The Taliban are a minimal threat.

You remind me of that Baathist Propaganda Minister in Iraq.

I have provided mounds of evidence that Saddam was a threat to the United States and was intent on attacking U.S. interests including one plan to train volunteer suicide bombers to attack the U.S..

And I already responded to that silly claim. You cut-and-ran, rather than answer my questions.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Only an idiot would conclude that invading a country with fewer troops would produce a better result than invading a country with more troops.

Only an idiot would conclude that invading Afghanistan with more troops would have been a good idea. The Soviets tried that once or maybe you've forgotten.

And I prefer to have millions of dollars and lots of hot women.

Afghanistan doesn't have the luxury of democracy. It is a war-torn failed state, and one of the poorest countries in the world.

A high % of the population disagrees with you.

You remind me of that Baathist Propaganda Minister in Iraq.

Pure sophistry.

And I already responded to that silly claim. You cut-and-ran, rather than answer my questions.

You did no such thing, I answered your questions, you somehow concluded that supporting terrorism against U.S. interests was not an act of war, just like the WMD's we found were not the right type of WMD's you concluded that these were not the right type of terrorists that Saddam was supporting.

 

[Iriemon]

But that isn't what you neocons have done. Sending an overwhelming force into Afghanistan, declaring martial law, and wiping out the Taliban and al-Qaeda would've been "killing the crocodile." Sending a force into Iraq - that was too small to pacify the country, but large enough to provoke more terrorism - was "kicking the crocodile." In fact, it was kicking a crocodile that was previously asleep and wasn't even a threat to you until you woke it up.

I actually thing the bees' nest analogy is more appropriate.

When you get stung by a bee, you either quit bothering the bees and leave them alone, or you make sure you kill them all. What you don't do is go up and whap the nest a couple times with a stick to let them know you didn't appreciate being stung by one of their members.

That has been the Iraq war -- whapping the nest.

 

[Vader]

Warmongers are those people who kick the crocodile, hoping it will go away.

:roll:

When a man kicks a crocodile he isn't doing so to drive the beast away. That kind of assumption usually comes from tree-hugging hippies and various other far left groups.

When a man kicks a crocodile he usually gets eaten... unless that man happens to be Steve Irwin.

However, if the man kicks the crocodile and then offers it a side of beef, hoping it will be too full to eat him; that man is an appeaser.

If a man kicks a crocodile while it's eating him, that man is brave.

If a man allows the crocodile to eat him without a fight, that man is scared ... or a coward or both.

:doh

:shock:

 

[Kandahar]

When a man kicks a crocodile he isn't doing so to drive the beast away. That kind of assumption usually comes from tree-hugging hippies and various other far left groups.

When a man kicks a crocodile he usually gets eaten... unless that man happens to be Steve Irwin.

However, if the man kicks the crocodile and then offers it a side of beef, hoping it will be too full to eat him; that man is an appeaser.

If a man kicks a crocodile while it's eating him, that man is brave.

If a man allows the crocodile to eat him without a fight, that man is scared ... or a coward or both.

:doh

:shock:

And what do you call a man who seeks out crocodiles who aren't bothering him and starts kicking them? The Bush Administration.

 

[Inuyasha]

When a man kicks a crocodile he isn't doing so to drive the beast away. That kind of assumption usually comes from tree-hugging hippies and various other far left groups.

When a man kicks a crocodile he usually gets eaten... unless that man happens to be Steve Irwin.

However, if the man kicks the crocodile and then offers it a side of beef, hoping it will be too full to eat him; that man is an appeaser.

If a man kicks a crocodile while it's eating him, that man is brave.

If a man allows the crocodile to eat him without a fight, that man is scared ... or a coward or both.

:doh

:shock:

You should be on "Animal Planet".

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

And what do you call a man who seeks out crocodiles who aren't bothering him and starts kicking them? The Bush Administration.

I have proven time and time again that Saddam was a very real threat to the U.S. and was intent on attacking the U.S., when will you people finally quit with the revisionist history bullshit?

 

[Iriemon]

I have proven time and time again that Saddam was a very real threat to the U.S. and was intent on attacking the U.S., when will you people finally quit with the revisionist history bullshit?

"Proven"? LOL with Weekly Standard articles and Freeper posts.

 

[Vader]

I have proven time and time again that Saddam was a very real threat to the U.S. and was intent on attacking the U.S., when will you people finally quit with the revisionist history bullshit?

They can't help themselves.

They are unable or unwilling to accept the truth. They would rather ignore the crocodile until it begins to eat them.

:doh

 

[missypea]

Its appeasement to talk to terrorist countries that are killing Americans...Syria and Iran come to mind......Pelosi should be charged for doing it.....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/23/AR2007042301764.html

Quote:

All that rancor irritated Hobson, a solid Republican who is well regarded within his party.

"Before we left, we met with the State Department people and nobody told us not to go," Hobson said, adding that none of his Republican colleagues broached the subject, either. "Nobody ever called me to say, 'Why are you going to Syria with those people?' "

Why, indeed. Especially when a group of Republican lawmakers led by Rep. Frank R. Wolf (Va.) traveled to Syria days before Pelosi's group.

Pelosi huh?.....and Frank Wolf and David Hobson and Darrell Issa........

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Bridging a Divide -- and Crossing an Ocean - washingtonpost.com

Quote:

All that rancor irritated Hobson, a solid Republican who is well regarded within his party.

"Before we left, we met with the State Department people and nobody told us not to go," Hobson said, adding that none of his Republican colleagues broached the subject, either. "Nobody ever called me to say, 'Why are you going to Syria with those people?' "

Why, indeed. Especially when a group of Republican lawmakers led by Rep. Frank R. Wolf (Va.) traveled to Syria days before Pelosi's group.

Pelosi huh?.....and Frank Wolf and David Hobson and Darrell Issa........

A) Those Republicans did not go to Syria to implement a secondary foreign policy as was the case with the Pelosi delegation which went well beyond the purview of a fact finding mission.

B) Frank Wolf is not the Speaker of the House.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

"Proven"? LOL with Weekly Standard articles and Freeper posts.

No with translated DOCEX documents.

 

[Vader]

And what do you call a man who seeks out crocodiles who aren't bothering him and starts kicking them? The Bush Administration.

Again, Kandahar, you fail to grasp the fact that some crocodiles are a threat to the security of the free world.

Liberals tend to dismiss a threat until it comes knocking on their door. This is a tactical error of epic proportions.

If a man wants to swim in a lake, but sees that lake has crocodiles in it, he must removed the crocodiles before he enters the water.

Liberals are perfectly willing to wait for the crocodile to eat them BEFORE they consider removing it from the lake. <---- Liberal policy.

Libertarians and Conservatives (No, this does not include neo-con scumbags like Dick Cheney) will kill the crocodile, make a pair of crockskin bathing trunks out of the crocodile's hide and THEN SWIM IN THE LAKE.

:roll:

 

[Slainte]

All analogies aside just now, it does seem that the Bush Administration is finally starting to talk to some of these "unsavory regimes".

US and Syria hold landmark talks

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has held a ground-breaking meeting with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem at a summit in Egypt.

Mr Muallem said the highest-level talks between the two countries in several years were "frank and constructive".

---

Earlier, a US military spokesman in Baghdad said: "There has been some movement by the Syrians.

"There has been a reduction in the flow of foreign fighters [through Syria] into Iraq" for more than a month, Major General William Caldwell said.

Can anyone who voted No in the poll please tell me how this meeting has harmed anyone?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

All analogies aside just now, it does seem that the Bush Administration is finally starting to talk to some of these "unsavory regimes".



Can anyone who voted No in the poll please tell me how this meeting has harmed anyone?

Pelosi was working against the authority of the President, she established a secondary foreign policy, Rice was speaking on behalf of the President.

 

[Slainte]

Pelosi was working against the authority of the President, she established a secondary foreign policy, Rice was speaking on behalf of the President.

Right, I don't really give a **** about American partisan politics.

She is talking to an unsavory regime right. How has it been anything but a good thing?

You can't lose by talking, if you don't get what you want then you have other options, but you don't have anything to lose!

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Right, I don't really give a **** about American partisan politics.

Exactly politics aren't supposed to be partisan when it comes to foreign policy.

She is talking to an unsavory regime right. How has it been anything but a good thing?

You can't lose by talking, if you don't get what you want then you have other options, but you don't have anything to lose!

The problem is that Pelosi is trying to estabish a secondary foreign policy and a shadow government, she is the Speaker of the House not the President she clearly overstepped her bounds and violated the separation of powers just like they are doing with the troop funding bill.

 

[Slainte]

Exactly politics aren't supposed to be partisan when it comes to foreign policy.



The problem is that Pelosi is trying to estabish a secondary foreign policy and a shadow government, she is the Speaker of the House not the President she clearly overstepped her bounds and violated the separation of powers just like they are doing with the troop funding bill.

I don't know if you're purposefully ignoring my point or just not understanding it.

Surely this meeting counts as "talking to an unsavory regime". That IMO is a good thing as I've explained all through the thread. I invite anyone who doesn't see it as a good thing to explain precisely why.

I don't care about Pelosi or the Democrats.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I don't know if you're purposefully ignoring my point or just not understanding it.

Surely this meeting counts as "talking to an unsavory regime". That IMO is a good thing as I've explained all through the thread. I invite anyone who doesn't see it as a good thing to explain precisely why.

I don't care about Pelosi or the Democrats.

Rice did not talk to the President of Syria she talked to one of his diplomats.

 

[Slainte]

Rice did not talk to the President of Syria she talked to one of his diplomats.

She talked to the Foreign Minister, a very high ranking member of the Regime. Of course she talked to the Regime!!!

Are you even going to attempt to address what I'm talking about?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

She talked to the Foreign Minister, a very high ranking member of the Regime. Of course she talked to the Regime!!!

Are you even going to attempt to address what I'm talking about?

The U.S. has talked to Syria many times they were our ally in the first Gulf War, Syria is not Iran.

 

[Slainte]

The U.S. has talked to Syria many times they were our ally in the first Gulf War, Syria is not Iran.

Yes but the Bush Administartion has been shunning them for the past few years and Iraq has deteriotated as a result. These talks are a welcome change of policy and most certainly not "appeasement".

Talking with Iran is a logical next step and essential if you want any type of success in Iraq.

 

[dragonslayer]

I agree it is not appeasement to talk to unsavory regimes. Why do you expect that legal regimes wants to have talks with the Bush Regime. they don't want to be bombed or atom bombed. So they talk to the Bush Regime.
I believe that It is the goal of the Bush Regime to drop Hydrogen bombs on some one before they leave office, just for the Kick of killing a lot of innocent people.

Then they will blame it on Bill Clinton. :applaud :monkey