DrG

It didnt help the time frame he was in. The way I see it, the president is only part of the solution. Everyone has to be willing to work for it to happen. If Carter can get that to happen, the right on, but this is Israel-Palestine we're talking about, and they've been hating each other for quite a while. So, while I applaud him, and the efforts, I have doubts.

I would expect nothing less from you. Liberals do not care about results, only intentions. And that is what scares me. The road to hell is paved with the best of intentions.

Carter trashes the U.S. Consitution, which assigns foreign policy to the Executive Branch.  Yes, he has every right to travel and speak as he pleases, but he doesn't go as a private citizen, he goes with his credentials as Former President.  The official policy of the US is that we don't negotiate with terrorists.  The ONLY thing that Carter can accomplish by his folly is to undermine the US.  If someone did this while Carter was president he would be just as mad as the present administration.  It shows his total lack of class, professionalism and integrity.

He should go back to doing humanitarian work, he was great  there and did a lot of good.

 

Kingbee:

Hey Kingbee! Haven't seen you for awhile!

Ah, the "October Surprise". What fun the press had with that... without much evidence to back it up.

Besides, that was a different administration. The Executive Branch changes with each administration. Since they are the ones who get to make foreign policy, only the current adminstration's foreign policy matters. Carter is abusing his status to undermine it. Pretty piss poor bit of unprofessionalism there.




No need for a coincidence at all. Reagan made no secret that if he was elected he wasn't going to stand around talking like Carter. He let the terrorist scum in Iran know that they would pay dearly if they held those Americans even one day while his butt was in the big chair in the oval office.

Carter ALWAYS negotiated from weakness. That rarely gets anything done... as evidenced by his neutered administration.

Prove it.

It may be (and I know you are going to deny this, and I will state it is my opinion) that they saw a strong leader that would not hesitate to bomb them back (or just to yesterday considering what the Mullahs did) to the stone age. So they knew they could not pull that shit with Ronnie.

That perception apparently was not only shared by the fruit cakes of Iran, but the democrats as well.

Your allegation has been investigated out the wazoo, and no evidence to even support it has been found. Yet you perist in the myth.

he gave em fruit cakes too?

Kingbee: [quote}eagles weren't lyin even a lil bit; that damn road outta eden is long as hell. if & when it smooths out some, i'm hopin to drop in more frequently. if nothin else, i'm considerably nearer you and all them brats than i've been in years. [/quote]

Come on by anytime, I got a freezer full of Brats, a grill that needs to be fired up for the first cookout of the year, and a guitar room to jam in... Come on by anytime.



Both Houses of Congress (which were run by Democrats back then), Newsweek, The New Republic and a boat load of reporters itching to be launched into the Woodward & Burnstein Stratosphere.. do you know what they all have in common? After more than a decade of digging, they found nothing....

Maybe you should turn them on to what you know. ;~D


(Now excuse me while I get fitted for a cervical collar) ;~D

and all this time i been imaginin there ain't no heaven.



we must be discussin two different issues.

"A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not. As the Tower board reported, what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages. This runs counter to my own beliefs, to administration policy, and to the original strategy we had in mind. There are reasons why it happened, but no excuses. It was a mistake"--ronald reagan, "address to the nation on the iran arms and contra aid controversy" (3/4/1987)

You don't talk to your enemies, you kill them.  Only someone like Carter would think that negotiating with islamic loons will result in anything.

 

Nah - that would be like shipping coals to Newcastle.

What strides were ever made in Iraq before the war? Hussein took Kuwait.. did talks free Kuwait from Hussein's rapists and thugs? NO. What did 12 years of "diplomacy" do after the ceasefire was signed? It made Hussein and a few UN officials a lot richer.

Carter has NO authority to speak for the nation. He has no right to play wannnabe diplomat while undermining a sitting president.

All he is accomplishing is blostering the image of murderous raping terrorists. He is a willing idiot and that's about it.

Granted, but that is Iraq, not Palestine. I would much rather try to talk to them before any other option, say for example, invading.

Besides, Bush never tried, he never truly tried. Frankly, He didn't do a lot beforehand.




How do you KNOW he is speaking for the US? From what I have read, he's talking to them, period. Just talking, seeing if there is anything that can be done. You'd be amazed what the right person can do while man others have failed at the same thing.