U.S., Iran to discuss chaos in Iraq Again?

U.S., Iran to discuss chaos in Iraq Again?

www.cnn.com

BAGHDAD, Iraq (Reuters) -- U.S. and Iranian envoys will hold talks in Baghdad to discuss the worsening chaos in Iraq, following up on a landmark meeting in May, Iraq's foreign minister said on Sunday.

"Iraq will host the second round of U.S.-Iranian talks on the 24th of this month," the minister, Hoshyar Zebari, told Reuters by telephone.

(visit the link for the full news article)

The Bush administration calls Iran a threat to world peace and security, and insists that Iran's nuclear ambitions must be stopped, even if by military strikes, and possible invasion.

Yet things in Iraq are so bad now, that they will have discussions with the Iranians, in an effort to find ways to help stabilize the war torn nation, not once, but now a planned new meeting?

Can we both end their Nuclear ambitions, and turn over the crisis in Iraq to them, and perhaps leave the Middle East all together?

Sometimes a deal with the devil himself may be a good plan!

It is quite likely that the Sunni population of Iraq are NOT very happy with this news.

www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 22-7-2007 by UM_Gazz]

Well to be honest I have no idea as to why the US is even considering dealing with Iran when it comes to the Iraq issue. It makes no sense to deal with anyone who on some level is aiding the insurgency and looking to destabilise Iraq.

Originally posted by xpert11
It makes no sense to deal with anyone who on some level is aiding the insurgency and looking to destabilise Iraq.

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. 'nuff said

humm, Cheney is not going to like this one at all, UM_Gazz, Bush diplomacy attempts are one of the things that is making Cheney go around Bush getting support for an attack on Iran.

This is nothing new. Before they met the first time they discussed having several meetings on the issue. Plus, the US is covering itself so when Iran hits our troops in Iraq and we end up attacking them, folks would complain that we should have been talking to Iran. Well we are talking to them so let them respond in a positive way. Bush has also repeated said the nuclear issue is seperate from the Iraq issue. Give the administration kudos for being able to sepearte the two and actually have a dialogue with the offending country. If it comes down to military action, so be it but at least we're trying to talk it out first.

Iran is getting MANY chances

[edit on 23-7-2007 by princeofpeace]

Maybe it'll conclude in a firery huff between nationals, with demands flying?
.

This is what Baker-Hamilton and the rest of the Iraq Study Group recommended. Do I think the White House is earnest and wants these talks to succeed? Of course not. They just want to be able to say they tried and substantiate future claims that the Iranians were too wacko to negotiate with. Cheney and his staff will sabotage the talks by making unreasonable demands.

Originally posted by princeofpeace
This is nothing new. Before they met the first time they discussed having several meetings on the issue. Plus, the US is covering itself so when Iran hits our troops in Iraq and we end up attacking them, folks would complain that we should have been talking to Iran. Well we are talking to them so let them respond in a positive way. Bush has also repeated said the nuclear issue is seperate from the Iraq issue. Give the administration kudos for being able to sepearte the two and actually have a dialogue with the offending country. If it comes down to military action, so be it but at least we're trying to talk it out first.

Iran is getting MANY chances

sorry this part cracked me up
so now Iran is the offending country


hopefully Iran uses this to their advantage and tells the US where to stick it
they caused it with the help of us brits so they should fix it.

sorry this part cracked me up
so now Iran is the offending country


LOL- No, actually Iran has BEEN the offending country...not just now!

Here is an related article .

"What good does it do to talk to the Iranians? Don't they just lie?" asked the young man at the hardware store where I went to buy what I needed to repair a broken screen door. He said he had served in Iraq – with the South Carolina National Guard – and has friends still "over there." His question deserved an answer – but I didn't have one. I'm as confounded by these developments as he is, but I vowed to get back to him after I learned more.

Thus far, talking has gotten us nowhere. Given the history of previous "negotiations" with the radical Islamists running Persia, their stated goals for driving "infidels" from "the lands of the Prophet" – and their unabated quest for nuclear weapons, we should be quietly supporting anti-Ayatollah movements inside Iran instead of further legitimizing the regime in Tehran with more talks.

source

Most of the time I dismiss North rantings as nothing more the usual works of the American right that have little bearing on reality. Once in an blue moon North does hit upon something that is worth looking into and thinking about and this is one of those cases.

Mind you I have never really understood the US actions when it came to invading Iraq up until recently at least IMO the war in Iraq is an pay back for those who supported Bush election as president .

So Iran has a secret nuclear program for 20+ years that was hidden until 2003 and the world is just suppose to shrug its shoulders and say "okay"? Wow...some folks on here really are out of touch-way out.

Well I didn't make my above to start an debate about Iran's nuclear program. But I do think that the opinion piece by North does illustrate the US inconsistencies in its approach to Iran .

Cheers xpert11.