Just my Thoughts · Politics

Iranian “Negotiations”

One time deal or a start to a series of negotiations, I am not sure I care.  I am, though, rather skeptical that the Bush administration is sending the number three State Department person – William Burns – to Geneva this weekend to join other countries in sitting down with an Iranian nuclear negotiator. 

Is this a flip-flop on the Bush administration part?  While it may not be a true flip-flop yet as the administration has not yet negotiated anything, it is definitely a severe departure from everything George W Bush has previously said.  Bush has repeatedly said that there were pre-conditions to sitting down with Iran.  None of these pre-conditions have been met.  Iran has not yet stopped enriching uranium. 

Is this a step towards relations with Iran again at some point in the future? 

Is this Bush’s last push before a preemptive strike?

Being always the skeptic, I would not believe that this is a step towards relations or negotiations with Iran.  I do believe, though, that this is a way for Bush to create a world view of having tried with a country that he has repeatedly indicated was next on the invasion list.

I find the thought of a major change like this from a man who just today said that the economy was not in horrible shape and we, as the US public, could have faith in its long-term condition scares the crap out of me.  He lives in a world where he will spin, using every credit of that Yale MBA, the Geneva meeting into a last ditch effort before an invasion.  He managed to spin to some extremely intelligent people prior to Iraq.  He is now setting up something.  The question is what?  And more importantly, can it be held off until after the man is out of power?

2 thoughts on “Iranian “Negotiations”

  1. What?! You have no faith in the economy?!

    I heard the story on the negotiations last night, and I hoped I was dreaming. The GOP is in a tough spot, with a long, hard battle ahead of them. One can only hope that the “powers that be” have put the reins on “W” and convinced him that it is long past time to make some policy changes that will put a better light on the party for the coming months.

  2. “Faith in the Economy?” What does that really mean? The US media seems to want you to believe that it means so much water in the bay that all boats will rise. But does it? When US corporations make profits overseas I hear people decrying the taking advantage of 3rd world economies–isn’t that where the water that used to raise all the boats came from? BTW, did it ever really raise all the boats?

    Every single day the US stock market is open, at least 10% of the stocks go up. That means somebody’s boat is rising. Capitalism means–if you own the right boat, your ship will sail. In the US people for 200 years have figured out how to sail–sometimes even without owning the boat. There are more people sailing today–than ever in history before, and they are living longer, sailing further and have no fears that tomorrow the water will dry up and their boats will be mud bound–or they wouldn’t be retiring younger, every year.

    I think that means they have faith in the economy and for good reason! You can listen to the doomsayers who see the watermark on every glass of fine wine–or you can notice with your own eyes that every restaraunt, retail outlet, movie theatre and vacation outlet that are producing what the public wants are jammed to the gills with customers spending money, and enjoying the fruits of their capitalist labor.

    It’s your own choice if your boat floats?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.