On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:55:17 -0500, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 08:55:44 -0500, BAR wrote:

...and Iran kicked it open.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...Name=topNew s

If you've been tracking info on Iran, you know the president is more
figurehead than executive and has a weak hand in dictating politics.
If the clerics who run the country thinks it's in their best interest
to engage, they will.

He does what the clerics tell him to do, he isn't a lose cannon, he is
on a short leash.

This is bluster and what was expected from Ahmadinigad, his rhetoric
is very predictable and a show for the region. Has little to do with
what will happen through diplomacy.

His rhetoric is calculated and controlled.

Did you expect them to bow down as say "Yes, sahib, whatever you
say!"?

No. And, I don't expect us to role over and expose our belly to every
petty dictator, the head cleric in Iran, in the region.

I love how you use Obama's offer of diplomacy to belittle him. You'd
obviously prefer Bush's "dead or alive" approach.

Yes I prefer Bush's approach to Obama's approach of throw away the stick
and then sit down and talk.

He is anything but controlled. A large percentage of his countrymen
think he's a lunatic.

GW spouted the same kind of crap in their direction. Do you expect
them to now trust us with open arms?

Stupid is as stupid does.

Obama is a lot smarter than Bush and will engage them in order to
affect the situtation. We can't starve them out, they have the oil
and will likely have more influence over Iraq once we leave.

On Jan 28, 10:31*am, jps wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:55:17 -0500, BAR wrote:
jps wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 08:55:44 -0500, BAR wrote:

...andIrankicked it open.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...90128?feedType....

If you've been tracking info onIran, you know the president is more
figurehead than executive and has a weak hand in dictating politics.
If the clerics who run the country thinks it's in their best interest
to engage, they will.

He does what the clerics tell him to do, he isn't a lose cannon, he is
on a short leash.

This is bluster and what was expected from Ahmadinigad, his rhetoric
is very predictable and a show for the region. *Has little to do with
what will happen through diplomacy.

His rhetoric is calculated and controlled.

Did you expect them to bow down as say "Yes, sahib, whatever you
say!"?

No. And, I don't expect us to role over and expose our belly to every
petty dictator, the head cleric inIran, in the region.

I love how you useObama'soffer of diplomacy to belittle him. *You'd
obviously prefer Bush's "dead or alive" approach.

Yes I prefer Bush's approach toObama'sapproach of throw away the stick
and then sit down and talk.

He is anything but controlled. *A large percentage of his countrymen
think he's a lunatic.

GW spouted the same kind of crap in their direction. *Do you expect
them to now trust us with open arms?

Stupid is as stupid does.

Obamais a lot smarter than Bush and will engage them in order to
affect the situtation. *We can't starve them out, they have the oil
and will likely have more influence over Iraq once we leave.

http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t...ons/obama5.jpg

jps wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:55:17 -0500, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 08:55:44 -0500, BAR wrote:

...and Iran kicked it open.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...Name=topNew s
If you've been tracking info on Iran, you know the president is more
figurehead than executive and has a weak hand in dictating politics.
If the clerics who run the country thinks it's in their best interest
to engage, they will.
He does what the clerics tell him to do, he isn't a lose cannon, he is
on a short leash.

This is bluster and what was expected from Ahmadinigad, his rhetoric
is very predictable and a show for the region. Has little to do with
what will happen through diplomacy.
His rhetoric is calculated and controlled.

Did you expect them to bow down as say "Yes, sahib, whatever you
say!"?
No. And, I don't expect us to role over and expose our belly to every
petty dictator, the head cleric in Iran, in the region.

I love how you use Obama's offer of diplomacy to belittle him. You'd
obviously prefer Bush's "dead or alive" approach.
Yes I prefer Bush's approach to Obama's approach of throw away the stick
and then sit down and talk.

He is anything but controlled. A large percentage of his countrymen
think he's a lunatic.

Who is in charge in Iran? It isn't the people, it is the clerics.

GW spouted the same kind of crap in their direction. Do you expect
them to now trust us with open arms?

The clerics in Iran, through their mouth piece, are going to walk all
over Obama.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Obama sure is stupid, dumb and out of his league on the world stage.

Obama is a lot smarter than Bush and will engage them in order to
affect the situtation. We can't starve them out, they have the oil
and will likely have more influence over Iraq once we leave.

Obama hasn't got a clue as to what he is doing.

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:21:51 -0500, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:55:17 -0500, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 08:55:44 -0500, BAR wrote:

...and Iran kicked it open.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...Name=topNew s
If you've been tracking info on Iran, you know the president is more
figurehead than executive and has a weak hand in dictating politics.
If the clerics who run the country thinks it's in their best interest
to engage, they will.
He does what the clerics tell him to do, he isn't a lose cannon, he is
on a short leash.

This is bluster and what was expected from Ahmadinigad, his rhetoric
is very predictable and a show for the region. Has little to do with
what will happen through diplomacy.
His rhetoric is calculated and controlled.

Did you expect them to bow down as say "Yes, sahib, whatever you
say!"?
No. And, I don't expect us to role over and expose our belly to every
petty dictator, the head cleric in Iran, in the region.

I love how you use Obama's offer of diplomacy to belittle him. You'd
obviously prefer Bush's "dead or alive" approach.
Yes I prefer Bush's approach to Obama's approach of throw away the stick
and then sit down and talk.

He is anything but controlled. A large percentage of his countrymen
think he's a lunatic.

Who is in charge in Iran? It isn't the people, it is the clerics.

GW spouted the same kind of crap in their direction. Do you expect
them to now trust us with open arms?

The clerics in Iran, through their mouth piece, are going to walk all
over Obama.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Obama sure is stupid, dumb and out of his league on the world stage.

Obama is a lot smarter than Bush and will engage them in order to
affect the situtation. We can't starve them out, they have the oil
and will likely have more influence over Iraq once we leave.

Obama hasn't got a clue as to what he is doing.

There's no sense in your responses, not backed up by any reasoning.

We are the leaders of the free world and Obama dispatched all comers
in free and open elections.

And you think he's out of his league?

You're obviously not a believer in America or Americans.