Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Back to the future on Iran negotiations without preconditions

Back to the future on Iran negotiations without preconditions

I don’t have a lot of time today because I’m working on something, but I did want to take note of the latest “non-leak leak maybe who knows” regarding supposed direct negotiations with Iran on its nuclear program.

The NY Times reports:

The United States and Iran have agreed in principle for the first time to one-on-one negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, according to Obama administration officials, setting the stage for what could be a last-ditch diplomatic effort to avert a military strike on Iran.

Iranian officials have insisted that the talks wait until after the presidential election, a senior administration official said, telling their American counterparts that they want to know with whom they would be negotiating.

News of the agreement — a result of intense, secret exchanges between American and Iranian officials that date almost to the beginning of President Obama’s term — comes at a critical moment in the presidential contest, just two weeks before Election Day and the weekend before the final debate, which is to focus on national security and foreign policy.

It has the potential to help Mr. Obama make the case that he is nearing a diplomatic breakthrough in the decade-long effort by the world’s major powers to curb Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, but it could pose a risk if Iran is seen as using the prospect of the direct talks to buy time.

The White House denies the story, and The Times “quietly edited” the story to pull back from the original report that talks were agreed upon, now using the term “in principle.”

This is all back to the future, and a result of Obama’s pre-presidential pledge to hold negotiations without preconditions, principally the precondition that Iran halt enrichment while negotiations are ongoing.  Without such a precondition, the negotiations simply are a stalling mechanism while Iran advances.

This was the case back in 2009, when Iran dangled the prospect of negotiations as a mechanism of deflecting criticism of its suppression of the Green Revolution and international sanctions.  Obama fell for it, or more accurately, encouraged it, and the negotiations went nowhere fast:

This will be an issue at the debate tomorrow night.  Hopefully Romney is prepared with a bit of history.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Highly Chamberlainesqe, this.

“Peace in our time”, and all.

But, after four years of SmartPower(tm) aka “weakness and apologia”, I really doubt the American people are going to buy THIS iteration of a pig-in-a-poke.

And if supporters of Israel don’t get the creepy-crawlies over this idea, they are asleep.

Happily, there isn’t really time for Obama to do much (more) damage before the election.

Well, the American people should see Obama with his hand on the Russian presidents arm telling him “I will have more flexibility after my election.” Then ask them “Who do you want representing the U S in talks with this man Ahmadinejad”?

All I know is that I just saw a NYT reporter (black female, don’t know her name) on Meet the Press call the 4 deaths in Libya “peripheral”…Dee Dee Myers and Tom Friedman seen nodding in agreement.

blood shooting from my eyes

WH sent orders to propaganda organ (NYT) to issue a trial balloon about possible US/Iran negotiations, to gauge reaction to such news and with hopes people might actually buy it. If it is accepted as true by the media and citizenry:

1. Obama looks better on foreign policy in time for Monday’s debate.

2. Obama could declare certain topics off-limits for debate “because we’re in negotiations with Iran and I cannot comment.”

3. Obama could provide badly needed distraction from the Benghazi mess.

Even if it were true, which I doubt, it would merely just be yanking Obama’s chain yet again as they’ve done before, a stalling tactic while they nuclearize, with zero interest in actual negotiations.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 21, 2012 at 12:04 pm

    We can be sure Iran wants a weak Obama POTUS, so they would say anything to aid his campaign. And they may be sending him cash, since Obama left that donation door open to the world.

The prof’ said it all … Obama is making the same meaningless proposal. The difference is Iran is four years closer to a nuke, after Obama made the claim that he would somehow magically stop them with his superior negotiation skills.

So Iran was five years from a nuke, when Obama promised he could negotiate. Obama now plans to stop them by doing the exact same thing that has accomplished exactly NOTHING to stop Iran from now being one year away.

Meanwhile, Iran backed Hamas could have their own Palestinian State, but refuse to even pretend that Israel has a right to exist. But Obama released $192 million to the Palestinian Authority, claiming otherwise. Which side is Obama really on over there?

JEEPERS, Y’all, let’s see what’s in it for Ahkmaspitooey and The Grand Mullah…Oh my, they’d want Obam-Bam re-elected due to the obvious FACT that he’s the WEAKEST U.S. President of modern times. Duuhhhhhh….Again, Duuuhhhhh…!

Pure Obama politics. The latest attempt to throw something against the wall hoping it will stick. Monkey feces doesnt stick ,it just runs down the wall leaving a smear. Especially when it is diarretic in consistancy ,coming from an overprimed monkey like either Obama or Howler Joe.

Hold on everyone!! The professor is working on something. What did Fauxohauntus do now…

JackRussellTerrierist | October 21, 2012 at 1:36 pm

If true, this is another “Lucy and the football” manuever by Iran; another blackmail-for-vote manuever by obastard.

[…] has been completely surprised by the announcement this weekend that “no preconditions” Obama has agreed to “talks” with Iran. Obama frequently made the assertion that he was keeping Israel not only informed but consulted as […]

Has everyone forgotten that muslims may lie to unbelivers with impunity? Iran will lie, cheat, and steal, as before, and just like the nazis did to Chamberlin in ’38.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend