Bush ignores Iran's offer to stop logistical support for Hezbollah. Why? |
| Posted by: h@ts | | Three facts that the US government never bothered to tell the American people.
If these offers from Iran were ignored then surely the question has to be asked: is Bush really trying to bring an end to the troubles in the Middle East, or merely using the trouble (much of which he has created) as yet more opportunities to further the necon agenda of "perpetual war" - see Leo Strauss: http://www.opendemocracy.net/debate...&articleId=1542
| quote: |
By Mark H Gaffney
http://www.informationclearinghouse...rticle14496.htm
08/11/06 "ICH" -- -- extraordinary new facts have come to light that have profound bearing on the deteriorating situation in the Mideast.
Iran’s head mullah, Ayatollah Khamenei, who is Ahmadenijad’s boss, have never been reported here in the US. In 2003 Iran offered to negotiate directly with the US. In its proposal the Iranian government agreed to accept the most stringent new International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) protocols on its nuclear program. The protocols would involve onsite inspection of all nuclear sites, something that our own government has never accepted. These tough verification measures would make cheating virtually impossible.
Iran also changed its long standing rejectionist policy on Israel. It agreed to support the 2002 Arab peace initiative, which offered Israel an end to the conflict if the Israelis would abide by UN Security Council resolutions (242 and 338) on Palestine. This was an extraordinary development, yet, it was not even reported in the US.
But Iran went still further. It also agreed to end its logistical support of Hezbollah in the event of a political settlement with Israel. Gareth Porter’s excellent backgrounder provides details about the 2003 initiative: http://www.informationclearinghouse...rticle14497.htm
|
So if Iran agreed to disarm; if they agreed to the 2002 Arab peace initiative; if they agreed to end their logistical support of Hezbollah. What is going on? | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: EUCLID | |
| quote: |
h@ts said this in post #1 :
Three facts that the US government never bothered to tell the American people.
If these offers from Iran were ignored then surely the question has to be asked: is Bush really trying to bring an end to the troubles in the Middle East, or merely using the trouble (much of which he has created) as yet more opportunities to further the necon agenda of "perpetual war" - see Leo Strauss: http://www.opendemocracy.net/debate...;articleId=1542
So if Iran agreed to disarm; if they agreed to the 2002 Arab peace initiative; if they agreed to end their logistical support of Hezbollah. What is going on? |
Well if Iran agreed to do it, why didn't they just do it?
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: h@ts | |
| quote: |
EUCLID said this in post #2 :
Well if Iran agreed to do it, why didn't they just do it? |
Here's some clues: America giving Iran the lable "Axis of evil" and message - you're next. America's attack on Iraq. Israel's attack on Lebanon. America's enormous stockpiles of WMDs. Israel's enormous stockpiles of WMD. The Palastinian conflict etc.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: EUCLID | | I guess it's easy to make offers if you can always blame somebody else for not delivering. | | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: h@ts | |
| quote: |
EUCLID said this in post #4 :
I guess it's easy to make offers if you can always blame somebody else for not delivering. |
I haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Bush claims to be fighting a so called "war on terror", but when Iran offers to stop it's logicstical support for Hezbollah; and agrees to support the 2002 Arab peace initiative, which offers Israel an end to the conflict; and agrees to accept the most stringent new IAEA protocols on its nuclear program, Bush doesn't even bother mentioning it to the American people.
What is Bush doing? Is he fighting a war on terror, or is he actually using the terrorist threat to carry out unpopular policy which is much easier with a frightened and docile population?
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: P.O.T.U.S. | |
| quote: |
EUCLID said this in post #4 :
I guess it's easy to make offers if you can always blame somebody else for not delivering. |
Europeans blaming the U.S. and Israel for something? Whatever might that be? 
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: EUCLID | |
| quote: |
h@ts said this in post #5 :
I haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Bush claims to be fighting a so called "war on terror", but when Iran offers to stop it's logicstical support for Hezbollah; and agrees to support the 2002 Arab peace initiative, which offers Israel an end to the conflict; and agrees to accept the most stringent new IAEA protocols on its nuclear program, Bush doesn't even bother mentioning it to the American people.
What is Bush doing? Is he fighting a war on terror, or is he actually using the terrorist threat to carry out unpopular policy which is much easier with a frightened and docile population? |
What I am talking about is that if Iran made all these wonderful offers in good faith, they would have carried through with them. Since Iran did not deliver on their offers, it seems likely that Iran was asking for something in return for their offers, and what they were asking in return was deemed too high a price to pay.
If this were the case, neither you nor your source mention that part of the story, which raises the question about your source withholding critical information in the same way that you raise a question about Bush not telling the world about Iran's offer.
But aside from that, if Iran made an attractive offer, they would certainly not have to rely on Bush to tell the world about it. Even if their offers were predicated on impossible demands, our TV networks would have relished the chance to take it to the people in order to show the world what a stubborn war monger Bush is. And if Iran's offers were predicated on unreasonable counter demands, the networks would have simply withheld that part of the story.
Therefore, since I did not hear a peep about it on the networks, I can only assume that Iran's offers were in such blatant bad faith that even the networks could not stomach it.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Dreamzwalker | |
| quote: |
EUCLID said this in post #7 :
What I am talking about is that if Iran made all these wonderful offers in good faith, they would have carried through with them. . |
Iran in good faith - that's a hoot. i remember hearing about this somewhere....
couldn't tell you where.
Good faith would have been showing you ment what you said by begining it and saying - look see what i did? but it didn't happen. iran instead came out and said Israel should be nuked off the world map. and they said it in the 90s, and 2000s... hmm nice people. I don't think iran should be nuked off the map - although may provide a really cool indigo nightnight 
I still can't remember where i read this........ think it was reuters.. nope don't think it was.. i remember reading/hearing about it somewhere though.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: h@ts | |
| quote: |
Dreamzwalker said this in post #8 :
Iran in good faith - that's a hoot. i remember hearing about this somewhere....
couldn't tell you where.
Good faith would have been showing you ment what you said |
Just a minute, what do you mean: meant what they said? Bush ignored Iran's offer and the chance to work for peace in the Middle East. Is he interested in peace or not, or is he interested in continuing the necon agenda of perpetual war? 9/11 happened in 2001. This so called "war on terror" has now lasted longer than America's involvement in WWII.
And as for "good faith" - you also seem to ignore or forget or don't care that America started a WAR in Iraq using WMD as a pretext to get the American people to support it. So when you're laughing at Iran because of "good faith" take a look in the mirror. And doesn't it bother you that Bush just used WMD as a convenient "bureaucratic" pretext to fool the US public into supporting his aggressive policy and WAR. Read this from the July 2003 issue of the magazine Vanity Fair, Paul Wolfowitz said: "For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on" The sheer arrogance is breathtaking.
According to the article I posted earlier http://www.informationclearinghouse...rticle14496.htm Iran offered to help America in Afghanistan with rooting out Al Qaeda, as well as the many other things they offered - like support for the peace process with Israel. For this they wanted a promise from Bush that he was not going to invade and start a war with them.
| quote: |
| by begining it and saying - look see what i did? but it didn't happen. iran instead came out and said Israel should be nuked off the world map. and they said it in the 90s, and 2000s... hmm nice people. |
Weird thing to say - Iranians are not nice people? Bush wanted war and ignored the offer of peace. Is that "nice" and does that therefore mean American people are not "nice"? You don't seem to understand who has been starting all the WARS in the last few years - AMERICA.
| quote: |
| I don't think iran should be nuked off the map |
Nice.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Dreamzwalker | |
| quote: |
h@ts said this in post #9 :
Weird thing to say - Iranians are not nice people? Bush wanted war and ignored the offer of peace. Is that "nice" and does that therefore mean American people are not "nice"? You don't seem to understand who has been starting all the WARS in the last few years - AMERICA.
Nice. |
I'm not refering to all Iran - just the leaders and those that support what he said.
As for WWII. we didn't want to be involved in it, and for good reason. we were struggling through the depression, and coming out of it - claimed many many lives. and public support was null for wwII. Depression was 1930 - 1939, so of course we didn't want to go to war. there was almost no money in the public, and again, no support for the war due to death, famine, and economic issues and pressure in the states. Had
Yamamoto not attacked pearl harbor i wonder how long it would have been before we were involved. We did send support over for the allies but it was not the number of troops they needed before japan attacked.
I wouldn't say that, there has been plenty of war and uprisings around the world that america didn't start. And besides, brats helped us start them in the past few years  go brats
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: Dreamzwalker | |
| quote: |
h@ts said this in post #9 :
So when you're laughing at Iran because of "good faith" take a look in the mirror.
|
I looked in the mirror and saw a sexeh scottish dude looking back at me. I also fixed my hair, brushed my teeth, took a shower.
I don't believe the leader of Iran. I also do not fully trust bush, or clinton, or the other bush, or your pm, and past pms. political men are not trustworthy. and never have been.
i supported saddam's removel due to his crimes. Had it been possible another way, it would have been nice. I supported my friends in the army, not bush. It would have been disrespectful on my part towards friends and family to protest against it. I would not go against my friends while they are facing death. I would not want them to die remembering me against them.
| | Reply To this Message
|
| Posted by: oneofpeace | | Dream I think it more disrespectful not to protest a war you view as unjust. How else do you bring your friends home instead of saying nothing and let them continue to risk their lives, and for what, to remove Saddam? One has to see the bogus in that lame excuse by now.
However, that’s another forum. As for Iran, if they were sincere in any offer or attempt to recognize Israel and stop logistical support for Hezbollah, then today ole boy wouldn’t be saying the things he’s saying today. Iran seized the opportunity to act on Bush’s obvious misfortune and it shows true intent.
Why didn’t Bush accept it? Arrogance, just like he’s displayed his entire tenure. We had no diplomatic relations with Iran since the hostage fiasco in 79.
I’m just afraid this war was nothing but a precursor to something worse yet to come. | | Reply To this Message
|
Israel & Palestine Forum: Bush ignores Iran's offer to stop logistical support for Hezbollah. Why?
|
