Carpet_pissr wrote:I want to see more direct, active engagement with Iran to avoid war before we start beating the drum so loudly.
You seem unable to realize that you can only talk when the opposite party is willing to talk:
The previous round of negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program broke down over a year ago in Turkey after Iran presented conditions considered unacceptable to the West.
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/inte ... index.html
Now Iran wants says it wants to talk:
Iran is ready to revive talks with the world powers, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday, as toughening sanctions aim at forcing Tehran to sharply scale back its nuclear program.
Even so, he insisted that the pressures will not force Iran to give up its demands, including to continue enriching uranium, that led to the collapse of dialogue last year.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012 ... nejad.html
If Iran's pre-conditions for talks are them retaining their nuclear program, then what is there to talk about? How do you propose getting them to put it on the table? Again, just saying "Talk to them" is meaningless if the proposed subject to be discussed isn't even on the table for discussion!?!
Define "more active engagement" for me. Exactly how would that differ from what has been done already? How would you get Iran to put the nuclear program on the table when they have now publicly said it is not a topic for discussion?
I want to see MORE public discouragement from the WH against Israeli military strikes (they did this once, several months ago...time to step it up).
Why public? And how do you know that they are not privately warning Israel? Public warnings may not be the best way to go.
We all know Israel can't wait to strike militarily...so we need to calm that shit down pronto, IMO.
Actually we don't know that Israel "can't wait to strike militarily". Do you have some inside source that no one else has?
FYI we are talking with the Israeli's:
In a series of private meetings with Israeli counterparts in recent weeks, Western officials have counseled patience, saying recent economic sanctions and a new European oil embargo are pummeling Iran’s economy and could soon force the country’s leaders to abandon the nuclear program. Yet Israelis are increasingly signaling that they may act unilaterally if there is no breakthrough in the coming months, according to current and former administration and intelligence officials.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html
He "offered" to talk, almost 4 years ago? That is not enough, again, especially from someone who was lashing out at the previous president for being hasty to go to war without following enough diplomatic routes.
The offer is out there and was rejected. There's no reason to make another offer unless you think it will be accepted and the Iranians have given no indication that it will. The President would look naively foolish if he were to make an offer and be turned down again. All Iran has to do is send a signal if they want to engage in serious talks.