The Iran propaganda begins in earnest

[LunaC]

U.S. says it's prepared to talk with Iran

WASHINGTON - In a major policy shift, the United States said Wednesday it is prepared to join other nations in holding direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program if Iran first agrees to stop disputed nuclear activities that the West fears could lead to a bomb.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060531/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/iran_nuclear;_ylt=Amjt3Slo1AjVo.dSoFqKw22s0NUE


The article title is misleading M$M propaganda…..

“U.S. prepared to talk with Iran” is supposed to make the harried and halfway-paying-attention public think that everybody is going to get together, talk things over and work out a deal conducive to all parties. Sounds “diplomatic” and reasonable. But that’s not what’s happening.

"(T)he United States…is holding direct talks with Iran…if Iran …first agrees…” That’s not a prelude to diplomatic talks but an unreasonable demand. Imagine one executive saying to another “I want to buy your company. Sign it over to me and then we’ll talk price.” That’s the type of deal * is offering, guaranteed to bring a “Fuck you!” response.

This is a carefully orchestrated maneuver intended to prime an unsuspecting public for an Iran attack. When the “diplomacy” fails as we all know it will, * can say “Well, we tried but Iran is being disagreeable and we have no choice but to respond militarily.” And the public will shuffle along, muttering to themselves “Yeah, we tried, right?” and go about their business while * drives us straight into the brick wall of an epic world crisis.

[walldude]

1. And this is different from the previous policy how?

You know, I'm really tired of the media and the Administration thinking I'm stupid enough to buy this crap...

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

2. I've Got A Bridge For Sale

If you believe any of the garbage that comes out of their mouths, then please buy my bridge.

[RethugAssKicker]

3. Un-fucking-believable ! Isn't it?

And you know, it's going to work... at least with the American public. As you stated, we the people will say that we did all we could, and that the Iranians were beligerent and deceitful !

[LunaC]

5. U.S Good --- Iran Bad

Lather. Rinse. Repeat

[LunaC]

4. This proves my point!

US Iran proposal doesn't surprise Israel

- big snip to last paragraph -

The source said that although he could not say where the negotiations might lead, they were a necessary precondition to any possible future use of force. Bush had to show his European allies, as well as his domestic audience, that he was willing to exhaust all diplomatic efforts to try and solve the problem, before gaining support for sanctions or possibly resorting to military measures.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1148482085086&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[TahitiNut]

17. Yep. Hostage-taker, holding gun, calling it "diplomacy.'"

Don't look behind that curtain of falsehoods. It's really astounnding that people are deluded by the rhetoric of a socipathic bully. We say "give us your lunch money or we'll bust your head with this baseball bat" and we call it 'diplomacy.' We talk about a "coalition" but it's just a gang ov coerced bully-boys. We call it a "negotiation" but it's the same ol' "my way or the highway" and "dead or alive" choices. Our "partners" in the global community are other corporatist regimes going against the will of the vast majority of their people!

The United States of Enronica is an outlaw nation under the control of a criminal regime.

[LunaC]

6. Tweety just said "It sounds like an ultimatum to me! "

The world must be ending if he "gets" how we're being set up.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

18. he just can't wait to see Commander Cuckoocodpiece get strapped up again.

[bigtree]

7. most of the ones I've seen have the same misleading premise

that Iran is insisting on holding on to a nuclear weapons program.

No mention that Iran hasn't threatened anyone and there's no proof of any intention to make a bomb.

[Philosoraptor]

8. What policy shift? Iran has WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!

[Jeffersons Ghost]

9. Kicked and Recommended

[sutz12]

10. Just curious, who's next?

After they run out of countries that start with "IRA___?"

:sarcasm:

[legin]

11. My guess : Saudi Arabia

The reasonimg (very hypothetical):

Question: Let's say it's a given that the u.s. gets kicked out of Iraq, what happens next ?

If I was Al Qaeda I'd quite like having the u.s. as an ocupping force in an Arab country. I don't think I'd appreciate being strangled to death from a distance using 'soft power', over anumber of years, like what happened to Vietnam.

So if the u.s. leave Iraq, I'd want them back in the region, as a sitting target, fairly quickly, so my troops/insurgents don't downgrade through inactivity.

One way for getting the u.s. back in the region for sure, is by stirring trouble in Saudi Arabia.

So say the u.s. know they are going to be in Saudi Arabia anyway in the next 5-10 years, why not do it under their agenda as opposed to Al Qaeda's.

It's possible that this recent bush*/Olmert/blair meeting was about Saudi Arabia, it would be too late Iran, I'd guess those decisions were made months ago. Possibly the CIA director got the boot for not being keen enough to fall in with these Saudi plans.

This is all pure speculation.

[tjwash]

16. The reason we are in Iraq is because Saudi WANTS us in Iraq.

They got sick if the US having their military bases on Saudi soil and the headaches that were associatted with it. So the shrubs Saudi masters told his dad to build their permanent military bases in Iraq instead, and they are bending over and complying like good little oil puppets.

[tjwash]

12. Last week they had the old "jews have to wear yellow stars in Iran"...

...lie being circulated around. The sad thing is, even though it got thoroughly debunked, there are still a significant amount of people that think that lie is true now.

[Tom Joad]

13. Some saner voices from Peace Action:Make the ME a nuke free zone

http://www.peace-action.org/home/01.24.06iranstatement.html

Peace Action Official Statement on Iran:
Renewing the Call for a Nuclear-Free Middle East

January 24, 2006

Today we are renewing the call for a Nuclear Weapons-Free Zone in the Middle East. Re-opening negotiations toward achieving that goal is the best way—perhaps the only way—to halt without violence the prospect of a nuclear arms race in that deeply troubled part of the world. Additionally, achieving a Nuclear Free Zone in the Middle East would bring the world one step closer to eliminating both the problem of nuclear proliferation and the threat of nuclear war and could serve as a model solution for resolving similar tensions in other regions of the world.

The call for a Nuclear Weapons-Free Zone (NWFZ) in the Middle East was first issued in 1974, when the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution calling for all states in the region to declare that they will refrain from producing, acquiring or in any way possessing nuclear weapons and nuclear explosive devices and from permitting the stationing of nuclear weapons on their territory by any third party. It also called for the states to place all their nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. In subsequent years, the General Assembly on several occasions renewed its call.

It is also pertinent that UN Security Resolution 687, passed in 1991, which demanded Iraqi disarmament, did so within the context of "establishing in the Middle East a zone free of weapons of mass destruction." It was alleged violations of this resolution which the Bush administration used to justify its illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq, even though Iraq had already complied with its disarmament provisions. The United States has refused to push for the full implementation of this resolution, however, by its refusal to support the establishment of a WMD-free zone for the entire region.

In 1974, Israel was the only Middle Eastern state that possessed nuclear weapons. Israel remains so today, and has rejected calls to sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty or place its nuclear facilities under IAEA inspection as mandated by UN Security Council Resolution 487. Other countries in the region have long asserted that Israel's nuclear arsenal poses a threat to their security and is a provocation to nuclear proliferation.

more

[Gregorian]

14. Just remember, preventative war works both ways.

We have every right to expect an attack from anyone in the world, if we use preventative war as a tactic.

It's all perspective. If Bush were the president of Iran, he would be blabbing about how America is a dangerous nation.

[LSK]

15. this is Iraq all over again

Then
Bush: give up your WMD
Iraq: we have no WMD

Now
Bush: give up your nukes
Iran: what nukes?