>>> Hmmm... I would guess Powell, former head of joint chiefs, former Secretary of State, finds merit in Obama's stance you dissed. You cite Kissinger, former Secretary of State.
Obviously he finds merit in Obama, otherwise he wouldn't have endorsed him. But there's no "expertise" in his support of Obama, simply an opinion...and it's an opinion that, quite frankly, leads me to suspect Powell's judgment in lieu of the realities that will face the new President.
>>> No difference, but you made a big deal about me offering my opinion.
Certainly not. You're free to offer your opinion on any topic you please...but don't expect me to hold it in higher regard than the opinions of those who have more credibility and experience than you do.
>>> In any case, I am not an expert on the middle east, hell I'm not an expert on anything. I do have an opinion, and 30 years ago majored in 20th century European history, so I'd not claim complete ignorance.
I would never accuse you of complete ignorance...simply that your opinions on foreign policy do not trump Mr. Kissinger's...in MY opinion. But I don't begrudge you having an opinion or expressing it...that's the fun of debating.
>>> In any case, talking to those we have differences with makes a huge amount of sense. Nothing bad can come from the endeavour, because we will make choices whether or not we talk.
That is the point I believe you are confused about. "We" have been talking. "We" have been engaged in diplomacy with Iran via lower level offices and through our European allies. The point...supported by many former Secretaries of State, including Kissinger...is that the PRESIDENT shouldn't meet with our enemies without preconditions as Obama has said he would. As (former UN Ambassador) John Bolton said recently...sitting down with Ahmadinejad, who wants to destroy Israel and build nuclear weapons, what exactly would Obama say to him?
Obama is simply too naive and inexperienced to be sitting in the Oval.
Yea, but some of us are actually old enough to remember the megalomaniac that he was after Reagan was shot. Just the sort of man you want around a 72 year old president - LOL. See there is a difference in reading about history and having actually lived through that time.
Pages
Again, because he isn't on your guys side of the fence.
http://www.spongobongo.com/no9961.htm
Mr. 'I'm in charge' Haig trying to 'take over'.
"eyeroll"
>>> Hmmm... I would guess Powell, former head of joint chiefs, former Secretary of State, finds merit in Obama's stance you dissed. You cite Kissinger, former Secretary of State.
Obviously he finds merit in Obama, otherwise he wouldn't have endorsed him. But there's no "expertise" in his support of Obama, simply an opinion...and it's an opinion that, quite frankly, leads me to suspect Powell's judgment in lieu of the realities that will face the new President.
>>> No difference, but you made a big deal about me offering my opinion.
Certainly not. You're free to offer your opinion on any topic you please...but don't expect me to hold it in higher regard than the opinions of those who have more credibility and experience than you do.
>>> In any case, I am not an expert on the middle east, hell I'm not an expert on anything. I do have an opinion, and 30 years ago majored in 20th century European history, so I'd not claim complete ignorance.
I would never accuse you of complete ignorance...simply that your opinions on foreign policy do not trump Mr. Kissinger's...in MY opinion. But I don't begrudge you having an opinion or expressing it...that's the fun of debating.
>>> In any case, talking to those we have differences with makes a huge amount of sense. Nothing bad can come from the endeavour, because we will make choices whether or not we talk.
That is the point I believe you are confused about. "We" have been talking. "We" have been engaged in diplomacy with Iran via lower level offices and through our European allies. The point...supported by many former Secretaries of State, including Kissinger...is that the PRESIDENT shouldn't meet with our enemies without preconditions as Obama has said he would. As (former UN Ambassador) John Bolton said recently...sitting down with Ahmadinejad, who wants to destroy Israel and build nuclear weapons, what exactly would Obama say to him?
Obama is simply too naive and inexperienced to be sitting in the Oval.
<.In an ideal world, Obama should win<> in a landslide....whether he actually will or not is another story.<>
Right, if only he were white... Then all the racist
Yes he is so underwhelming.
Alexander Meigs Haig, Jr.
Pages