Yes, we can.

[scaeagles]

I don't buy that.

Terrorism is a means to an uncompromising end. Ahmadinejad supports terrorism because it helps him in his uncompromising goal of the elimination of Israel. As long as we are friends and defenders of Israel that will be directed at us as well.

I don't think Obama wants Iran as our best friends. Again, it comes down to being naive.

To think that iran would be straight forward at a negotiating table is as naive as when Clinton believed North Korea really wouldn't use the nuke plants we built them to assist in their nuclear programs, because, golly, they said they wouldn't do that.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

To think that iran would be straight forward at a negotiating table is as naive as when Clinton believed North Korea really wouldn't use the nuke plants we built them to assist in their nuclear programs, because, golly, they said they wouldn't do that.

Whoever claimed that they'd expect them to be straight forward? That's not the point. Of COURSE they'll be dishonest. Of COURSE their goals will not match ours. Of COURSE they would be trying to get the most out of any negotiation, any way they can.

All of that is beside the point. Lies can be just as informative as the truth. And negotiations that end in absolutely nothing happening or no deal being made can be just as influential as a unilateral cease fire agreement. The whole point is that having a dialog is a means of learning something about the enemy. No one has ever made the ludicrous commitment that by agreeing to talks we are going to agree to demands. That's absurd and simply not going to happen.

By not talking, you are guaranteeing that you're shutting out a source of information. Whether what they actually say at the talks is truthful or not is entirely irrelevant. The more interface we have with them, the more we know them.