The left is thrilled. After all, these are people who are enthralled with the French, who passed secrets to our enemies.

Don't let them fool you. Democrats, like all good socialists, believe the government knows better than you. Beware.

Herb

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2006-12 -07T204342Z_01_L0796336_RTRUKOC_0_US-EUROPE-SOCIALISTS-US.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

I wonder how the leftists will spin this one.

From the article:
"[Socialist leaders attending a meeting of the European Socialist Party pledged that with the Democrats on the rise, strong ties could be renewed with the United States after years of cool relations with Republican President George W. Bush.

Regardless of whether we, the U.S., agree or disagree with "Socialist leaders," and regardless of whether they are friends, or enemies who want to destroy us, there has to be some dialog between us and them. We're stuck on the same planet with them, therefore some communication, not appeasement mind you, but high level communication is necessary. Even Eisenhower, Nixon, etc., recognized this during the height of the cold war with the USSR. GWB on the other hand has not.

If Nixon had not established better relations with communist China and Russia the world would likely be in much worse shape today than it is.

If the middle east situation is to improve we must have some form of communication with Iran, Syria, etc. It's not just me saying this, but this is one of the messages coming from the bi-partison Iraq Study Group.

Why is this?

Simple. Reason rules in the end.

Without communication, reason cannot exist between parties.

"...there has to be some dialog between us and them."

But that's not the issue. The reality:

"...with the Democrats on the rise, STRONG TIES could be renewed.."

Herb

What do we say to the terrorists, Herb? Please we beg you, stop your bombing?

Since democrats are big on the Iraq study group, let's hear them tell us how making nice with Iran and Syria will work.

These two countries vow to destroy not only America and Israel, but Western Europe as well with their forthcoming nukes.

And if taking the fight to their neighborhood isn't the answer, what is?

Diplomacy with terrorists? We've tried that plenty of times and it doesn't work. It's called appeasement.

Herbert Milhous

OK - one thing at a time;

Herb, who, exactly, said " These two countries vow to destroy not only America and Israel, but Western Europe as well with their forthcoming nukes. " Obviously that is a paraphrase. So I'll grant you that. But I mean, that's a pretty direct sounding statement. I'd like to see it myself - without the paraphrase.

I'm not saying that they didn't say it. I'm asking to see it myself, courtesy of you maybe, so we can use the same information and probably come to the same conclusion. But if I was to say " They love us and want to be our friend." you'd ask me to cite where I got that.

So I'm asking for your cite.

I'm sure the socialists aren't the only ones looking forward to more dialog with the US. With 6 years of Bush fucking shit up, we're lucky anybody in the world still gives a damn about us.

The funny thing for Herb is that he still has the gall to come here and even post after getting his ASS kicked this past election. Your team took one to the sack!! Your entire Bush Administration war policy has been labeled a complete FLOP and FAILURE! And this is on a war that we already know shouldn't have been waged. Thanks to Bush et al, almost 3000 US troops are dead and underground.

Hilarious!

..and the brutal part is the hits are gonna keep coming. The full punishment is not over yet.

"Your entire Bush Administration war policy has been labeled a complete FLOP and FAILURE!"

What's YOUR answer to the problem, then? Kum-bah-yah with Iran?

Herb

I know what the answer ISN'T, and that's whatever Bush's policy is. Face it, you're wrong, you've been told you're wrong all along, and now it's been proven that you're wrong. The sad and pathetic thing is, you still support the chimp.

Bush is a good man

Diplomacy with terrorists? We've tried that plenty of times and it doesn't work. It's called appeasement.

Herbert Milhous
--------
Its called LOSE, Herb!

It's now widely accepted that Bush is the worst president ever. Even his Dad was in tears the other day dealing with the disappointment that Jeb Bush will never have the chance to run due to GW poisoning the name Bush beyond belief.

Yep. That one is in the bag, tagged and properly accounted for.

Anything, but what that guy wants to do is likely to our benefit. Maybe we can get somebody to make him think he wants to do it. Dangle dollars or something...

Since you politicize the non-political, don't cry on this board when others do the same to you.

Herb

Funny thing, when we were in the Cold War, we talked with Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Somebody recently said, I don't remember who, "you make peace with your enemies, not your friends."

This probably not an exact quote, but JFK said at his inaugural speech "never negotiate out of fear, but never fear to negotiate." Bush thinks that to talk with your enemies is a sign of weakness, when it is actually a sign of strength.

?!?

Uh, yeah. I thought this WAS a political thread.

No?

You lost me on that one, Herb.

Herb asked - " What's YOUR answer to the problem, then? Kum-bah-yah with Iran?"

Well smarter men than me will have to answer that question. But in the interim, uh yeah. It looks like your administration is going to exactly that. Get working with Iran. Are you against diplomacy with Iran? Or were you literally saying " I just don't want to sing kum-bah-yah with Iran. But yes, I will support diplomacy. But no singing songs. Really. I mean it."

Define " Singing Kum-bah-yah with Iran." What does that even mean?

Cowboy diplomacy is a miserable failure. It's time for a new angle and new ideas. This is why the GOP was kicked out of the majority in both the Senate and House.

Cowboy diplomacy is very effective when done correctly and with assistance but the problem is that George W went all "Lone Ranger" on it and made a terrible mess of it.

"Cowboy diplomacy is a miserable failure."

Not necessarily. You just have to know when to use it.

Reagan used cowboy diplomacy with the Soviet Union early on, from calling the Soviets the "Evil Empire" to the huge military buildup he oversaw. However, he realized a golden opportunity and took the bull by the horns with the promotion of Gorbachev. He KNEW that Gorbachev was someone he could work with, and I think we all know the end result.

It can be said that JFK used cowboy diplomacy when dealing with Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and ol' Nikita blinked first. Pretty effective there.

Dubya simply is not intelligent enough to use it. The blueprint is in his hands, from a bi-partisan commission of very well respected experts in the art of foreign diplomacy, and the President shrugs it off and commits to "stay the course" with his buddy Tony Blair at his side.

I think you mean with Tony Blair in his lap.

Reagan and JFK were much smarter cowboys than GW Bush. In fact, I think it's an insult to both JFK and Reagan to be mentioned in the same breath as George W. Bush.

"Reagan and JFK were much smarter cowboys than GW Bush. In fact, I think it's an insult to both JFK and Reagan to be mentioned in the same breath as George W. Bush."

My point exactly. I was stating that some CAN and HAVE used cowboy diplomacy.

Dubya wouldn't know what diplomacy was if it kicked him in the nads.

You know he did in a figurative sense recently! And he really doesn't grok diplomacy.

Go ahead Herb. I too want to understand what "Kum-bah-yah" means.

There are a lotta ways to apply serious pressure, not all of them involve direct violence.

"I too want to understand what "Kum-bah-yah" means."

Ineffectual UN gobbledygook that accomplishes nothing. Making nice with those who mean us harm. Feelgood diplomacy where political correctness reigns. Positing that we all have the same goals when we do not.

Herb

Ok. That largely works.

I'm not sure on the last one, but that's ok.

So, what about UN stuff that does work? (and there is plenty that does)

Shouldn't we be pushing that stuff hard, given our military action just isn't proving to be workable right now?

Screw the UN, why can't countries just get together and talk? Such ego's!

IMHO, this is why the UN is an important construct. If we see majority support for the UN, then it can be considered a place where nations can come together as peers.

That leveling effect empowers some diplomacy that would otherwise be off the table.

So Herb, just to be clear, you think that working a diplomacy angle with Iran is a bad idea?

If I thought it would work to try diplomacy with Iran, I'd be for it.

But you're likely to have the same degree of success with Iran as you did with Saddam.

These people don't just hate anyone not like them. They want to DESTROY anyone not like them. They don't believe in live and let live.

Iran is beginning to remind me of China-a snake that's growing. Except the Iranians don't appear willing to wait to do their dirty work. They want to destroy the US, Israel and even Western Europe, ASAP.

I would hope that we could use diplomacy. However, as with Mr. Hitler, reasoning with a madman is not accomplished without smarts and verifiable force. At some point you have to say: "Why does this look so much like 1938?"

Herbert Milhous

Herb said - " If I thought it would work to try diplomacy with Iran, I'd be for it."

Me too. We agree. I don't have tons of faith that it would work either. I have more than you. But less than I wish I had.

So back to my other question; Does singing Kum-Bah-Yah with Iran = diplomacy attempts? Is that what you were driving at?

I think you're overestimating Iran.

One nuke is all it takes.

Look, Iran is not likely to behave like Israel, India or Pakistan, all of whom are nuclear nations.

We either address it before they use one, or after the fact...if we're still around.

Herb

I'm not concerned about Israel, they have nukes themselves and can take care of themselves. Let Israel fight it's own battles.

We start to address it diplomatically. As a last resort, we bomb. Unfortunately, our current president doesn't believe in diplomacy.

"Does singing Kum-Bah-Yah with Iran = diplomacy attempts? Is that what you were driving at?"

I addressed this on another thread.

Essentially, it's feelgood diplomacy that accomplishes nothing.

Think of a group of people, such as the UN, or any group of nations, in a meeting. They have a problem and then make plans, financial pledges and committees to address it. At the end, they're holding hands and singing kum-bah-yah.

Then when they leave, they go right back to what they were doing before.

It's poseur diplomacy.

Herb

So you would just prefer we bomb them now and get it over with?

What's your plan?

Herb

Our plan is to answer questions with questions. And then tell you what we DON'T want.

Seems to be all the rage.

I'll bet Herb thinks it should be done ASAP, Christmas Day would probably good for him.

FYI, the song, "Kum Ba Ya, my Lord" has been translated alternately as either, "Come by here, my Lord," or "Come here now, my Lord."

I didn't think Herb was against that.

My plan would be to see what we could do to solve our issues with them. If you don't talk with your enemy, nothing will get done. This bullshit of "we don't negotiate with our enemies" is dead wrong.

What's your plan?

If you don't like the current plan, give us a better one.

Anything else is political sniping.

Herbert Milhous

I just gave you one. What's wrong with President Bush inviting Mackmood to DC for a man to man talk? Even it it will most likely fail, it could lead to something down the road.

Political sniping, my ass. What's your plan? Do you think we should just bomb them now?

"What's wrong with President Bush inviting Mahmoud to DC for a man to man talk?"

Giving this crazed, nuke-seeking, Jew-hating terrorist a forum is precisely what he wants.

Like you're going to negotiate with a guy who says the holocaust didn't happen?

Herb

What does Bush say to him? Would you please not build any nukes?

What's your plan Herb, for the third time?

Hey, I'd negotiate with you, and you believe in god, and I believe your belief in god and Mackmood's belief the holocaust never happened are equally nutty.

You are in the minority.

The overwhelming majority of Americans believe in God.

Most of your countrymen would say that YOU are the out of step one.

Herb

Actually that's not really true.

If you consider the sum of ideals expressed here by you two, that sum is aligned far closer to the current trends for Reinstatepete, than you Herb.

The elections make a clear case for that.

Having faith is not the primary qualifier for any characterization of ones proper alignment with the popular view. It's more granular than that.

To continue to keep the focus there is being less than honest.

Herb's way of doing EVRYTHING...

BOMBS AWAY!

KILL EVERYONE!

You don't believe the way I do! BOOM! Death! Destruction! NUKE EM! GET RID OF EVERYONE THAT'S NOT CHRISTIAN!

Herb said>>>>
You are in the minority.

I think your asinine political thinking and killing of everyone that doesn't agree with you makes you the BIGGEST minority on planet Earth sir.....

"If you consider the sum of ideals expressed here by you two, that sum is aligned far closer to the current trends for Reinstatepete, than you Herb."

Ahh.

NOW we're ok to use generalizations. Just a day ago, generalizations meant little. Which is it?
Or does it simply depend upon which makes a more conveeeeeenient argument for the left?

Herbert Milhous

Not the same thing.

You were alluding to Reinstatepete being poorly aligned with Americans in general.

Then you chose a specific element for the comparison.

Either generalize or not.

Most of the candidates and measures I voted for in November were winners. How many winners did you have Herb? If you voted like Lars, probably not many.