[quote]Sloth wrote:
100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
100meters wrote:
Thanks for finally admitting he has no power.
I believe the Ayatollah has also said the have no interest in developing nuclear weapons.
and of course this is what they wanted in 2003:
"The document lists a series of Iranian aims for the talks, such as ending sanctions, full access to peaceful nuclear technology and a recognition of its “legitimate security interests.” Iran agreed to put a series of U.S. aims on the agenda, including full cooperation on nuclear safeguards, “decisive action” against terrorists, coordination in Iraq, ending “material support” for Palestinian militias and accepting the Saudi initiative for a two-state solution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The document also laid out an agenda for negotiations, with possible steps to be achieved at a first meeting and the development of negotiating road maps on disarmament, terrorism and economic cooperation.
Newsday has previously reported that the document was primarily the work of Sadegh Kharazi, Iran’s ambassador to France and nephew of Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi and passed on by the Swiss ambassador to Tehran, Tim Guldimann. The Swiss government is a diplomatic channel for communications between Tehran and Washington because the two countries broke off relations after the 1979 seizure of U.S. embassy personnel.
Leverett said Guldimann included a cover letter that it was an authoritative initiative that had the support of then-President Mohammad Khatami and supreme religious leader Ali Khamenei."
When we get a president skilled at foreign policy, there’s a good chance we could return to that.
You’ve got the most obvious info block I’ve ever seen. You turn all I’ve posted, into me admitting he has no power? Wow! I’d wager the vast majority of people reading are directing a big “huh?” your way. I guess you ignored what I’ve posted, and turned my “for the sake of arguement” text into an admission.
Wow, a document! Where’s the announced public recognition of Israel? Where’s the announced ‘decisive’ anti-terrorism laws? By the way, it’s an admission of funding terrorist groups, at least in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And, can be seen as an addmission to turning a blind eye towards terrorism, in general. But, but, if we allow them this, then (and only then…) apperently they’ll take “decisive” action against terrorism. “Hey, we just want nuclear power for peaceful reasons! And we’ll agree to start being peaceful if you allow this!”
Instead, the “powerless” president gets to set the tone of the Nation (destruction of Israel, threats to europe) under the hapless Supreme leader, I guess. Seems to me that Supreme Leader would be telling the “powerless” maniac to shut the fuck up and sit down.
Here, I’ll use your attitude. You can apologize now. And, thanks for admitting you’re wrong!
[/quote]
Sigh, since you still aren’t getting it…
The president doesn’t speak for the supreme leader, and for the most part are GREATLY at odds, in fact the supreme leader probably resents the presidents popularity which stems from his semi-socialist agenda (anti-privatization, pro-working class, etc.). The supreme leader’s goal are very much oriented to privatization and economic policy that benefits the bazaari interests. Hence the supreme leader’s great interest in achieving normal relations with the U.S. (prior to being rebuffed by Bush–but still there to some degree) In short the two ARE NOT A TEAM!!!
for some perspective the supreme leader’s council feels this way:
In the middle of a tirade about the pointlessness of talking with the Bush administration, a senior Iranian official I met in Tehran last month abruptly paused and asked if he could speak off the record. Then he said: “What we need is an American president who will follow the example of Richard Nixon going to China.”
There in a nutshell is what this Iranian government, and most Iranians I’ve spoken to, fervently desire from the United States: not the tactical talks offered last week by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice but strategic recognition of Iran as a great civilization and a regional power that must be treated, like China, as a “stakeholder” in global affairs. Grant us that, said the Iranian official I saw, and “just as with China, you’ll find a government that is more responsive to your concerns, more willing to play a cooperative role.”
It was interesting to hear that pitch from an officer of a government whose president has recently invited the United States, aka “global arrogance,” to abandon democracy and accept the dissolution of Israel. It was a reminder that, whatever President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may say in public, obtaining recognition from Washington remains one of the Islamic regime’s foremost goals – and perhaps the most powerful nonmilitary card the West holds in seeking to stop Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.
and…
ISTANBUL – As diplomatic maneuvering continues over Iran’s nuclear program, the cleric who holds ultimate authority in the country has signaled twice in recent days that Iran intends to engage the wider world it long held at bay.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, announced the formation of a new council to advise him on foreign affairs and a new privatization program aimed at preparing Iran for eventual membership in the World Trade Organization…
…The formation of a new foreign relations panel may also indicate dissatisfaction with the foreign policy performance of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Khamenei named as the panel’s chairman Kamal Kharrazi, the man Ahmadinejad removed as foreign minister after taking office last year.
“I think it’s significant,” said a European diplomat in Tehran, who asked to not be identified further so that he could speak openly. “Personally, I think it amounts to trying to put limits to the president.”
The new Strategic Council for Foreign Relations also includes another former foreign minister, a former admiral in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a former commerce official and a cleric with hard-line credentials who has served as Iran’s ambassador to China. The new council joins a constellation of existing government panels devoted to foreign policy, but it will report directly to Khamenei, who “sensed a deficiency,” Kharrazi told Iranian media.
Bill Samii, who follows Iranian affairs for U.S.-funded Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, said Ahmadinejad’s confrontational rhetoric reflects the views of fellow veterans of the eight-year war with Iraq, when Iran was bitterly disappointed to find itself fighting alone. Western powers and Arab states supported Saddam Hussein’s secular Iraq.
“Ahmadinejad and his cohorts play up the sort of appeal to the Third World and the Non-Aligned Movement on the nuclear issue, and of course their background and their experience in the war with Iraq teaches them you want to be as self-sufficient as possible,” Samii said. “But the leadership and people in responsibility know you can’t go it alone. You can’t walk the talk.”
So as I said before, what the president says—doesn’t matter. It’s what the Supreme leader says that matters, and what they want is quite different. Obviously.
Your apology, of course is accepted in advance. Poor Zap’s too.