[IWE] will disgree on the sadat comment
William Oxley
iwe@warhead.org.uk
Fri, 26 Sep 2008 19:12:35 -0400
****************************
""t is also true that we used to set as a precondition for any =20
negotiations with you a mediator who would meet separately with each =20
party.
Yes. Through this procedure the talks of the first and second =20
disengagement agreements took place.
Our delegates met in the first Geneva conference without exchanging a =20=
direct word, yes, this has happened.
Yet today I tell you, and I declare it to the whole world, that we =20
accept to live with you in permanent peace based on justice. We do =20
not want to encircle you or be encircled ourselves by destructive =20
missiles ready for launching, nor by the shells of grudges and hatreds."
**************************
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/sadat_speech.html
************Palin is not on the same page, she's off in another =20
building somewhere..."
along with the rest of the republican party and a large amount of =20
democrats I suspect.
On Sep 26, 2008, at 6:58 PM, D. Scott Katzer wrote:
> Hi Jay and All,
>
> I know this has been commented on most of you already, but I wanted =20=
> to throw my $0.02 in. To keep the context, I'll comment here.
>
> Jay Mehaffey wrote:
>> Another jaw dropping moment of stupidity. You can Kissinger wrong, =20=
>> you can call him evil, but trying to call him naive is idiotic.
>
> I think she got caught up in her talking points and didn't mean to =20
> call him naive and having bad judgement. In effect, though, she =20
> did. After all, anyone who agrees with Obama is obviously naive, =20
> hates America, etc., etc.....
>
>> Jay
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ilan-goldenberg/palin-calls-=20
>> kissinger-nai_b_129445.html?view=3Dprint
>> *Couric:* You met yesterday with former Secretary of State Henry
>> Kissinger, who is for direct diplomacy with both Iran and =20
>> Syria. Do
>> you believe the U.S. should negotiate with leaders like President
>> Assad and Ahmadinejad?
>> *Palin:* I think, with Ahmadinejad, personally, he is not one to
>> negotiate with. You can't just sit down with him with no
>> preconditions being met. Barack Obama is so off-base in his
>> proclamation that he would meet with some of these leaders around
>> our world who would seek to destroy America and that, and without
>> preconditions being met. *That's beyond na=EFve. And it's beyond =20=
>> bad
>> judgment.*
>
> Of course, Obama didn't make a "proclamation", he answered a =20
> question at a debate. And he gave the correct answer, in my =20
> opinion, when you consider the *actual question*:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3De3Oj7Jn9rv4
>
> It's a 2:43 clip of the question and Obama's answer, among others.
>
> In other words, Obama and Kissinger are on the same page on the =20
> issue of talking to our "enemies". Palin is not on the same page, =20
> she's off in another building somewhere...
>
> > *Couric:* Are you saying Henry Kissinger ...
> >
> > *Palin:* It's dangerous.
> >
> > *Couric:* ... is na=EFve for supporting that?
> >
> > *Palin:* *I've never heard Henry Kissinger say, "Yeah, I'll meet
> > with these leaders without preconditions being met."* =20
> Diplomacy is
> > about doing a lot of background work first and shoring up =20
> allies and
> > positions and figuring out what sanctions perhaps could be
> > implemented if things weren't gonna go right. That's part of =20
> diplomacy.
>
> I don't think that Sadat went to Israel after getting a bunch of =20
> concessions beforehand. The question was whether Obama was willing =20=
> to actually talk to lay the foundation for a breakthrough. Bush's =20
> and his followers' idea of diplomacy and negotiation is: "Give us =20
> iron-clad guarantees that you'll agree to give us what we want, and =20=
> then we'll talk about sitting down to talk about what you want."
>
> Cheers,
> Scott.
> _______________________________________________
> IWE mailing list
> IWE@warhead.org.uk
> http://lists.warhead.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/iwe