Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: When Is A Meeting Between The U.s. And Terrorists Not An Act Of Weakness?

  1. #1
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Post Thanks / Like

    When Is A Meeting Between The U.s. And Terrorists Not An Act Of Weakness?

    When you can make millions with them.....

    [SIZE="4"][B]Rice meets Gadhafi on historic visit to Libya[/B] [/SIZE]

    By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer
    6 minutes ago

    The United States and Libya sealed a historic turnaround after decades of terrorist killings, American retaliation, suspicions and insults with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's peacemaking visit Friday with Moammar Gadhafi, Libya's mercurial strongman.

    "The relationship has been moving in a good direction for a number of years now and I think tonight does mark a new phase," Rice said following a traditional Muslim dinner the evening meal that breaks the day's fast observed during the holy month of Ramadan at Gadhafi's official Bab el-Azizia residence. It is the same compound hit by U.S. airstrikes in 1986 in retaliation for a deadly Libyan-linked terrorist attack in Germany. The attack killed Gadhafi's baby daughter.

    "We did talk about learning from the lessons of the past," Rice said. "We talked about the importance of moving forward. The United States, I've said many times, doesn't have any permanent enemies."

    Rice is the highest-ranking American official to visit Libya in a half-century. The United States considers Gadhafi rehabilitated since the days when President Reagan called him the "mad dog of the Middle East," because of the Libyan's surprise decision in 2003 to renounce terrorism and give up weapons of mass destruction. His government has also agreed to resolve legal claims from the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 and other alleged terror attacks that bore Libyan fingerprints.

    "Libya has changed, American has changed, the world has changed," Foreign Minister Abdel-Rahman Shalgam said following a meeting with Rice. "Forget the past."

    Gadhafi welcomed Rice in a room redolent of incense. Wearing flowing white robes, his trademark fez and a green pin of Africa, Gadhafi bowed slightly and put his right hand over his heart in a traditional Arab greeting. The two did not shake hands, but Gadhafi did shake the hands of Rice's male aides.

    They then exchanged pleasantries, with Rice offering Gadhafi greetings from President Bush and Gadhafi asking about the hurricanes that have hit or are headed to the U.S. mainland, before dozens of reporters, photographers and television cameramen were ushered out.

    Their small talk belied almost 30 years of dismal U.S.-Libyan relations that hit their low point in the 1980s when Reagan ordered the retaliatory airstrike and Gadhafi swore revenge.

    "We're off to a good start," Rice said later. "It is only a start, but I think, after many, many years, it's a very good thing that the United States and Libya are establishing a way forward."

    The United States withdrew its ambassador from Libya in 1972 after Gadhafi renounced agreements with the West and vilified the United States in speeches and public statements. Washington cut off diplomatic relations with Libya after a mob sacked and burned the American Embassy in 1979.

    The notoriously secretive Gadhafi was to host Rice at but the venue remained mysterious and U.S. officials could say only that they expected it to be in a tent.

    Gadhafi is known for often unpredictable behavior and has cultivated images as both an Arab potentate and African monarch since taking power in a 1969 coup. In a televised address to the nation this week he said he considers the United States neither a friend nor an enemy.

    In an interview with Al-Jazeera television last year, Gadhafi spoke of Rice in most unusual terms, calling her "Leezza" and suggesting that she actually runs the Arab world with which he has had severe differences in the past.

    "I support my darling black African woman," he said. "I admire and am very proud of the way she leans back and gives orders to the Arab leaders. ... Leezza, Leezza, Leezza. ... I love her very much. I admire her, and I'm proud of her, because she's a black woman of African origin."

    Rice is the first secretary of state to visit Libya since John Foster Dulles in 1953 and the highest-ranking U.S. official to visit since then-Vice President Richard Nixon in 1957.

    Libya has agreed to pay compensation to the families of victims of the 1988 Pan Am bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland, and those of a 1986 attack on a disco in Berlin. The disco attack killed two U.S. servicemen and drew Reagan's order to attack Libyan targets, including Gadhafi's residence.

    Rice was spending only a few hours in Tripoli, an ancient city fronting the Mediterranean Sea and backing to the North African desert but took time to visit the offices that serve as the U.S. Embassy in Libya.

    Plans to send a full-fledged ambassador and build a new embassy are hung up in Congress over concern that Libya has not fulfilled its promises to compensate terror victims.

    [B][SIZE="4"]Rice's visit comes amid a surge in interest from U.S. companies, particularly in the energy sector, to do business in Libya, where European companies have had much greater access in recent years. Libya's proven oil reserves are the ninth largest in the world, close to 39 billion barrels, and vast areas remain unexplored for new deposits. [/SIZE][/B]

    [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080905/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_libya_rice&printer=1;_ylt=ApIBJs1w4DafUGMJz_TtCzSWwvIE[/url]

  2. #2
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    7,992
    Post Thanks / Like
    [I][QUOTE]When Is A Meeting Between The U.s. And Terrorists Not An Act Of Weakness?[/QUOTE][/I]

    When the poster has absolutely no clue what the hell he's talking about. Your interpretation of this event in the context of events within the past decade exposes an embarrassing ignorance. Gadhafi has capitulated with his hat in his hand.

  3. #3
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE]We did talk about learning from the lessons of the past," Rice said. "We talked about the importance of moving forward. The United States, I've said many times, doesn't have any permanent enemies."

    Rice is the highest-ranking American official to visit Libya in a half-century. The United States considers Gadhafi rehabilitated since the days when President Reagan called him the "mad dog of the Middle East," because of the Libyan's surprise decision in 2003 to renounce terrorism and give up weapons of mass destruction. His government has also agreed to resolve legal claims from the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 and other alleged terror attacks that bore Libyan fingerprints.

    "Libya has changed, American has changed, the world has changed," Foreign Minister Abdel-Rahman Shalgam said[/QUOTE]

    Isn't this supposedly the exact kind of Diplomacy that many here, including you IJF, have been demanding for years now?:confused:

    If your political enemies here on the forum are hypocrites for their position of "never talk to terrorists".....how can you not also be one for complaining (whining is more like it) about the very diplomacy you demand from Bush and cheer/expect from Obama?:confused::huh::confused:

  4. #4
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wildcat Country
    Posts
    4,875
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2729950]Isn't this supposedly the exact kind of Diplomacy that many here, including you IJF, have been demanding for years now?:confused:

    If your political enemies here on the forum are hypocrites for their position of "never talk to terrorists".....how can you not also be one for complaining (whining is more like it) about the very diplomacy you demand from Bush and cheer/expect from Obama?:confused::huh::confused:[/QUOTE]

    A fair point. The reality of the world is sometimes you have to make deals with the bad guys. The "never negotiate" crowd are pretty naive. Which, BTW, is not to say we should negotiate with bin Laden under any circumstance.

  5. #5
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2729950]Isn't this supposedly the exact kind of Diplomacy that many here, including you IJF, have been demanding for years now?:confused:

    [B]If your political enemies here on the forum are hypocrites for their position of "never talk to terrorists".....you not also be one for complaining (whining is more like it) about the very diplomacy yohow can u demand from Bush and cheer/expect from Obama?:confused::huh::confused:[/QUOTE[/B]]

    I am not.

    And you have made my point.

    There is a remarkable double standard here. When Obama talks about talking to terrorists (and based on his actions in the past, many people around the world still look at Gadhafi with trepidation) he is jumped on by the 'John Wayne' crowd. But now that Condi is sent to break bread with a terrorist (and break the bank for some well connected companies) its okay.

    The double standard is the point. I agree that its past time we rethink our 'Rambo' approach to foreign affairs. But the old stereotype that [B]all[/B] democrats are weak and [B]all[/B] republicans are strong is a bedtime story for the weak minded.
    Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 09-05-2008 at 07:57 PM.

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2729930] Blah, blah, blah, Exxon Haliburton Blah, blah, blah[/QUOTE]:zzz::zzz::zzz:

  7. #7
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2730014]:zzz::zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE]

    How do you not get dizzy from having your head in the sand all day? :zzz::zzz::zzz:

  8. #8
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    7,992
    Post Thanks / Like
    It's diplomacy [I]now[/I], at [I]this [/I]point. The reason why Gadhafi has kept his nose clean for the past 5 years, however, is a direct result of the use of force -- in Iraq. After 18 years of virtually useless sanctions on Libya, his first act of suddenly eager capitulation just happened to be days before the invasion of Iraq in 2003, as he saw firsthand the power that was being brought to bear on his sh:tbag clone, Saddam. His final act of capitulation (completely agreeing to the terms laid out by the U.S. and Britain) occurred just days after the U.S. dragged Saddam out of his rat hole. After 18 years of useless sanctions, the capitulation and nine months of "negotiations" in which Libya agreed to our demands just happened to frame the period between the massive invasion of Iraq and the capture of Sadaam. Wow, what a coincidence :rolleyes:

    Diplomacy is working now (and then) in Libya ONLY as a DIRECT collateral result of the overwhelming use of military power.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2730035]How do you not get dizzy from having your head in the sand all day? :zzz::zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE]
    Easy- I count my dividends from my energy stocks and ETF's. Drill, drill drill!:yes:

  10. #10
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,376
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2730048]Easy- I count my dividends from my energy stocks and ETF's. Drill, drill drill!:yes:[/QUOTE]

    An arugula fan, I see...

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,481
    Post Thanks / Like
    Didn't Gaddafi turn his back on terrorism some time ago? The islamo-terrorists (the Al Qaeda variety) target the West AND secular Islalmic leaders like Gaddafi. Gaddafi's terrorist movement (Nasserite Arab nationalism) were pretty much spent by the early 1990's.


    Nice try IJF.

  12. #12
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    131
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=shakin318;2730037]It's diplomacy [I]now[/I], at [I]this [/I]point. The reason why Gadhafi has kept his nose clean for the past 5 years, however, is a direct result of the use of force -- in Iraq. After 18 years of virtually useless sanctions on Libya, his first act of suddenly eager capitulation just happened to be days before the invasion of Iraq in 2003, as he saw firsthand the power that was being brought to bear on his sh:tbag clone, Saddam. His final act of capitulation (completely agreeing to the terms laid out by the U.S. and Britain) occurred just days after the U.S. dragged Saddam out of his rat hole. After 18 years of useless sanctions, the capitulation and nine months of "negotiations" in which Libya agreed to our demands just happened to frame the period between the massive invasion of Iraq and the capture of Sadaam. Wow, what a coincidence :rolleyes:

    Diplomacy is working now (and then) in Libya ONLY as a DIRECT collateral result of the overwhelming use of military power.[/QUOTE]

    Exactly. If some people knew a little bit about recent history they would have known Libya gave up its WMD programs as the direct result of what they saw happen in Iraq. Give Ghadafi some credit....he learned from Sadam's mistakes.

  13. #13
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    131
    Post Thanks / Like
    Oh yeah...that and N. Korea (even though they are now presumed to have started their nuke program again) are two other significant victories that Bush gets no credit for and has been completely ignored by the national media.

  14. #14
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,988
    Post Thanks / Like
    Gadahfi hasn't sponsored anti-Western terror groups since the 1980s; which he was punished for through air raids and through economic sanctions. Gadahfi (supposedly) gave up his WMD program in the wake of the Iraq invasion (sanctions were lifted in exchange) and my guess is that Condi is going there to ensure that the process remains as transparent as possible.

    Iran and Syria, however, continue to fund and aid anti-American and anti-Israeli terror networks inside Iraq, Lebanon, and elsewhere. Nowhere is this more apparent than the Quds Force operatives in Iraq or through Hezbollah's bunker networks in Lebanon. Iran is also pursuing nuclear weapons as a means of guaranteeing their protection against Israeli or American force and as a means of threatening Israel. Iran so far will not even accept a Russian agreement that would allow [B]Russian inspectors[/B] to check their facilities because it would violate their sovereignty. To me that is an indicator that they are trying to pursue these weapons as quickly and secretively as possible and are not prepared to concede anything of value. If President Obama or President McCain decide to meet with Khatami or Ahmadinejad either: nothing will happen, or we will get taken to the cleaners as we did in the 1994 North Korean negotiations.

    Don't get me wrong, you can't refuse to talk with your enemies but imo, they better be enemies of some considerable importance to grant concessions to. Take for instance when the previous Columbian president granted concessions to the Marxist narco-terrorist group FARC and they seized more than half the country; violence increased and FARC was emboldened, considering they were the closest to overthrowing the government that they had ever been I don't blame them. Now this is an off target comparison because I am discussing a terror network. Take also, for instance, the agreements made with North Vietnam, the pointless 1961 Vienna Summit with the U.S.S.R, or the recent Congressional delegation to Syria.

    In brief, if nuclear weapons and the support of terror groups is in the national interest of Iran and Syria, then no amount of 'hard diplomacy' will make them give up those policy objectives. If there are threats and consequences promised for certain actions, then they may be more receptive to capitulating.

  15. #15
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    7,992
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=XingDaorong;2730615]
    In brief, if nuclear weapons and the support of terror groups is in the national interest of Iran and Syria, then no amount of 'hard diplomacy' will make them give up those policy objectives. If there are threats and consequences promised for certain actions, then they may be more receptive to capitulating.[/QUOTE]

    Yep. With rogue states, diplomacy is best achieved at the point of a bayonet.

  16. #16
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,747
    Post Thanks / Like
    Gadhafi may be the dumbest leader ever if he believes what you are saying. Tremendous military power? An over stretched military and we couldn't do anything to anyone because of the double war we are involved in.

    [QUOTE=shakin318;2730037]It's diplomacy [I]now[/I], at [I]this [/I]point. The reason why Gadhafi has kept his nose clean for the past 5 years, however, is a direct result of the use of force -- in Iraq. After 18 years of virtually useless sanctions on Libya, his first act of suddenly eager capitulation just happened to be days before the invasion of Iraq in 2003, as he saw firsthand the power that was being brought to bear on his sh:tbag clone, Saddam. His final act of capitulation (completely agreeing to the terms laid out by the U.S. and Britain) occurred just days after the U.S. dragged Saddam out of his rat hole. After 18 years of useless sanctions, the capitulation and nine months of "negotiations" in which Libya agreed to our demands just happened to frame the period between the massive invasion of Iraq and the capture of Sadaam. Wow, what a coincidence :rolleyes:

    Diplomacy is working now (and then) in Libya ONLY as a DIRECT collateral result of the overwhelming use of military power.[/QUOTE]

  17. #17
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Boynton Beach, Florida
    Posts
    6,184
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote=intelligentjetsfan;2729930]When you can make millions with them.....

    [SIZE=4][B]Rice meets Gadhafi on historic visit to Libya[/B] [/SIZE]


    [URL]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080905/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_libya_rice&printer=1;_ylt=ApIBJs1w4DafUGMJz_TtCzSWwvIE[/URL][/quote]
    I guess it is not when your Kennedy meets with Hitlers cronies during WW II :eek:

  18. #18
    flushingjet
    Guest
    [quote=cr726;2730621]Gadhafi may be the dumbest leader ever if he believes what you are saying. Tremendous military power? An over stretched military and we couldn't do anything to anyone because of the double war we are involved in.[/quote]

    One could say Iraq was not prosecuted properly until the surge-and be right to a degree, and the counter argument would be the PC ROE (ie a NON scorched earth policy) the military operated under limited the destruction/scope- and also be right to a degree

    However, the "Stretched" military argument may be the most perfidious lie
    that has been continously trotted out by the left. Shame that anyone, least of all any ex-military would utter it because they should know better.

    With thousands of troops sitting in barracks worldwide, jets and bombers idle in hangars and carriers, and missiles gathering dust in their silos we hadn't used but a fraction of our power.

    The US fought 3 fronts in WW2, Europe, Africa and Asia-the latter almost singlehandedly with far less brute force and technology then is possible today-and still won-
    just another simple minded argument from people who like to see America lose.

    Another convenient fact the unpatriotic stooges leave out-Libya, who the libcentric intelligence and state Dept did not know had WMD
    (but certainly the oil $ to get some) made like a Frenchman and flipped like a pancake, renouncing their arsenal as a result of our Iraq invasion.
    QED anyone with a brain could deduce that if Libya had WMD, AQ Khan could have made WMD possible for all the Islamic nations, especially the ones with the spondulix
    (Iran, SA)

    Another good result of the Iraq war-knock out 2 WMD countries, scare more into giving them up (the Norks) or working with us (Pakistan) with the threat of (TAD) Their Assured Destruction. Only the Iran-Syria axis is holding out, with one getting theirs a few months ago- no points for guessing who's next.

    The guessing game is who'll do it-Bush can do it right after the election
    and I believe if B Hussein wins it'll be go time. The CinC has a 60- 90 Day Window under the War Powers Act to do basically whatever he wants
    before obtaining Congressional approval of that action and by the time the dickering is done between arguing between that & Article II, Section 2 as his authority to send soldiers into combat etc. itll be too late for Ahmanutjob and
    we'll all be better off as a result.
    Last edited by flushingjet; 09-06-2008 at 11:51 AM.

  19. #19
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,747
    Post Thanks / Like
    No draft and you are out of your mind. The military invaded to countries and are still heavily burdened. You see what you want to see, WW2 has nothing to do with this.

    [QUOTE=flushingjet;2730714]One could say Iraq was not prosecuted properly until the surge-and be right to a degree, and the counter argument would be the PC ROE (ie a NON scorched earth policy) the military operated under limited the destruction/scope- and also be right to a degree

    However, the "Stretched" military argument may be the most perfidious lie
    that has been continously trotted out by the left. Shame that anyone, least of all any ex-military would utter it because they should know better.

    With thousands of troops sitting in barracks worldwide, jets and bombers idle in hangars and carriers, and missiles gathering dust in their silos we hadn't used but a fraction of our power.

    The US fought 3 fronts in WW2, Europe, Africa and Asia-the latter almost singlehandedly with far less brute force and technology then is possible today-and still won-
    just another simple minded argument from people who like to see America lose.

    Another convenient fact the unpatriotic stooges leave out-Libya, who the libcentric intelligence and state Dept did not know had WMD
    (but certainly the oil $ to get some) made like a Frenchman and flipped like a pancake, renouncing their arsenal as a result of our Iraq invasion.
    QED anyone with a brain could deduce that if Libya had WMD, AQ Khan could have made WMD possible for all the Islamic nations, especially the ones with the spondulix
    (Iran, SA)

    Another good result of the Iraq war-knock out 2 WMD countries, scare more into giving them up (the Norks) or working with us (Pakistan) with the threat of (TAD) Their Assured Destruction. Only the Iran-Syria axis is holding out, with one getting theirs a few months ago- no points for guessing who's next.

    The guessing game is who'll do it-Bush can do it right after the election
    and I believe if B Hussein wins it'll be go time. The CinC has a 60- 90 Day Window under the War Powers Act to do basically whatever he wants
    before obtaining Congressional approval of that action and by the time the dickering is done between arguing between that & Article II, Section 2 as his authority to send soldiers into combat etc. itll be too late for Ahmanutjob and
    we'll all be better off as a result.[/QUOTE]

  20. #20
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    L.I. NY (where the Jets used to be from)
    Posts
    13,337
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2729950]Isn't this supposedly the exact kind of Diplomacy that many here, including you IJF, have been demanding for years now?:confused:

    If your political enemies here on the forum are hypocrites for their position of "never talk to terrorists".....how can you not also be one for complaining (whining is more like it) about the very diplomacy you demand from Bush and cheer/expect from Obama?:confused::huh::confused:[/QUOTE]

    Great point.

    If this meeting isn't held, the Bush Administration are war-mongers with no diplomacy.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us