« Previous · Home · Next »
Sitting at the Table With Iran?
By Charlie
WASHINGTON (AP) - The United States said Wednesday it would join in face-to-face talks with Iran over its disputed nuclear program if Tehran first agreed to put challenged atomic activities on hold, a shift in tactics meant to offer the Iranians a last chance to avoid punishing sanctions.Iran dismissed the offer as "a propaganda move."
Before leaving for meetings in Europe on Iran, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that while the U.S. was willing to join talks between European nations and Iran, it was also helping to prepare a package of sanctions that Tehran could face should it decline the new offer.
"We're prepared to go either way," she said
Look, we’ve covered this fairly thoroughly. Bottom Line Up Front:
-Iran won’t stop (verifiably) enriching uranium, therefore, the offer of the US participating in the talks is a diplomatic-based exercise, not a reality-based one.
-The EU-3 came to this conclusion 3 years ago, and is not prepared to either impose sanctions or lend their support to a military campaign.
-Russia and China will stick together. Until one of them can be peeled off to the West’s side, no sanctions will ever be imposed on Iran.
Therefore, working off of the “give a mouse a piece of cheese” model, the next move by the international community/Iran will be pressure on the US to engage in bilateral talks. This, of course, smacks of unilateralism.
But, hey… 2003 and OIF-1 was 3 years ago. I’m sure the world community would be fine with us engaging Iran in a good old-fashioned discussion like Southern and Southern (West Asian) gentlemen.
Oh, and additionally, it will now be exclusively OUR fault when negotiations fail (again).
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://op-for.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/224
Comments
Lots of pieces moving around on the board in many directions. This story if true to what Maliki is talking will be a major major move. Division size IA move into Basra with Martial Law already declared for 3months. Maliki claiming “iron fist” for the Militia’s (Sadr and the Badgr are who dominate this critical territory bordering Iran and both of these militias I would put forward as direct proxies of Iran).
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/iraq/14709648.htm
Hattip to Security Watchtower great site
What will Irans move be? Allow their proxy trump cards in Iraq surrender, will they fight while Iran watches them be slaughtered like last time, or will Iran jump? All options are losers for Iran.
Going to be one hell of a summer.
Well, it takes two to tango. If 'engaging' with Iran on this is so obviously pointless, why are we trying so hard to do it?
“If 'engaging' with Iran on this is so obviously pointless, why are we trying so hard to do it?”
Simple Legion, to entertain the LLL’s like you. We got to for some reason so the EU and lightweight LLL’s can have that warm fuzzy that all options whether likely or not to succeed were tried.
But yeah it’s a waste of time and no nothing will come of the even further begging and offered bribes to pacify bad behavior. Ohhh and the part that really sucks is the LLL’s still wont support the war and they still wont help or even recognize that we tried. And somehow it all will be America’s fault and even more so Bush’s fault.
You're a charming fellow, C-low. But this isn't Jimmy Carter or Jesse Jackson running some kind of peace caravan around the region, it's Condi friggin' Rice. Does that mean she's an LLL, whatever that is?
[url="http://hometown.aol.com/young15500116/porn-text-stories-in-hindi.htm"]porn text stories in hindi[/url]
Well, it takes two to tango. If 'engaging' with Iran on this is so obviously pointless, why are we trying so hard to do it?
true thanks
Post a comment
Potential comment conditions listed here. Oh, and you may use basic HTML for formatting.
"Sea of glass, visible from space."
I'll fly, you drop.
.