What should we say to them?

Where is your red phone to tap now that I'm ok with that.

I would prefer to hear your plan on that actually.

It might go something like this (and it's a familiar little tune):

"bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb-Iran. Bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb-Iran. Ohhhh, bomb-Iraa-aaan..."

" What should we say to them? "

I assume by " we " you mean The Bush Administration?

"I would prefer to hear your plan on that actually."

I don't have one, that's why I asked.

"I assume by " we " you mean The Bush Administration?"

No CJ, I mean the United States. If the liberal position is "direct diplomacy", I am curious as to what that should be comprised of. I don't know the answer.

We should say to them that they will be better off by being peaceful than by saber rattling. Only problem is, the current adminstration can't take that position because they'd then be admitted hypocrites.

But OK - I'll try it out;

We should say everything to Iran. Incentives. Promises. Packages. More bull semen. Include them in future plans to try and make peace in their part of the world.

We should also say the kinds of things that we said to North Korea. Find out what it is that they really need and want, and try and find a way to let them earn it.

Now Deane, I know you are just poised and ready to say " What if that doesn't work? Then what? "

Then we asses the threat to The United States and implement sanctions to isolate them as much as " we " can. I would also gauge our direct and personal reaction to Iran based on how willing it's neighbors are to participate. If we attempt to do the things I have listed, and find ourselves alone in this fight, then I say we back off, back out, announce that other nations, for whatever reasons, have chosen not to participate in this process, so that is their message that we hear loud and clear. Give us a call if you need any help. But you guys think you have it all under control, I guess. We honor your sovereignty and you will now honor ours. Good luck. We believe that you can handle it on your own too."

There. There is my answer.

Your turn, Deane. You answer this; Why should " we " bomb them? You've said that before. I assume you still feel that way. But I'll make you a compromise - I can see a time in which it would be necessary to take military action. I do not believe that time is today. You do. Why?

Do you feel that Diplomacy is EVER a good thing?

Edit add - Deane, the reason I asked you to define " we " is because I do believe it matters from whom this message is delivered. Like Vitalogy said, it's a MUCH tougher sell from Bush. We all know why. But it will be something the next President will have to deal with. So if you mean Obama, then I will say that I believe he has a better ability to deliver a message of " I will lead by example. Trust me. " And that has to count for something. You can't deny that some people are better at Diplomacy than others. So if Obama is saddled with Iran when he takes office, I'm much more willing to hear and try his plans than I am, say, our current President, who has no credibility left.

Does the core of your aversion to Diplomacy stem from " it gives the opponent toomuch time "? If that is the case, then I assume you'd be fine with Bush leading a military strike before he leaves office? Even though he has the anti-midas touch, you think it should be done by us, ASAP?

What would be wrong with letting other nations take the lead on this?

Doesn't the other side have to also want diplomacy to work?

Mabye they do Deane, we just haven't figured that out yet.

"Walk softly (diplomacy) but carry a big stick (carrier group)"

Teddy R. was right on when he said that.

Back up diplomatic exchange by moving the last chess piece we have, the U.S. Navy, into a more aggressive location.

Saber rattling is less expensive than a misguided invasion, especially since we don't have the resources to open another front.

Iran needs to be a little more nervous about what they are doing.
Should the U.S. be hit with another Katrina like hurricane, al Queda may attack the Saudi oil fields to further exacerbate the energy crisis, which enables Iran. The chess game between Iran and the U.S. would be a lot different in a world of $200 oil. The U.S. needs to control the Persian Gulf. Had we not wasted so many lives, so much money, time, resources on Bush's folly in Iraq, we'd be in a more advantageous position with regards to Iran's missile play. I don't advocate any more than a show of strength and resources that remain. If Bush had any brains he would start moving troops around NOW.

I'm looking for an updated version of this:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/where.htm

Anyone know where that might be?

Doesn't the other side have to also want diplomacy to work?

Yes. Are you implying that it never goes that way? Because if you are, that is not true.

Latests news on topic...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,378324,00.html

Iran Test-Fires Missiles in Response to Israeli, U.S. 'Threats'...
"Our hands are always on the trigger and our missiles are ready for launch," the official IRNA news agency quoted Gen. Hossein Salami, the air force commander of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards

Their ready to shoot the big guns.

Broadway,

I find it interesting that you would disparage a post in another thread linking to the "Atlantic Free Press" as a "left wing smear website", but you have no problem linking to Fox News.

A known right wing smear organization.

FoxNews is just my cup of tea these days for current web news along with bookmarked CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC and a few more...recognized as a legitimate mainstream news service...never heard of Atlantic Free whatever before yesterday...lopp them with the Daily Kos and Huffington Post...which I don't have bookmarked!
On the web now days you can find a site to back up any political bent.

Fox is not a news service. They produce newstainment, which is a complex blend of fact and opinion that leaves their regular viewers less informed than those who watch "fake news" shows, like "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart".

This is not to say there are not good people, who know how to do journalism, working at FOX. That's not the case. (feel sorry for them too, but somebody has to do it)

The problem is that there are not enough of them to balance out the rest of the clowns.

If you are watching FOX, for your primary news, you are extremely highly likely to not be properly informed on the issues of the day. This is likely because the network works very hard to make sure you, the viewer, get the message, not the facts.

This is a demonstrated, absolutely known true fact.

A real news production would clearly present facts and messaging, so that the viewer would be very highly likely capable of making their own judgments as to how well the message is supported by the facts.

Generally speaking, most of the FOX message, isn't all that well supported, meaning either they just get tagged for airing bullshit, or they blur the lines so the viewers don't know any better.

And that's the genius of Rupert Murdock.

Fox NEWS -- The more you watch, the less you know.

I know Iran wants us to "just respect" them, but I don't know really why we should. They don't respect us, I mean we never have received an apology for them taking our people hostage in 1979/80. I guess I don't have a problem with Obama wanting to talk to them directly, however a formal apology needs to be a condition to do this. I haven't forgiven.

"we never have received an apology for them taking our people hostage in 1979/80."

How far do you want to go back?

Sure taking the hostages was a crime and worthy of an apology, but did we ever apologize for overthrowing their government in 1953, for oil?

It's too bad George W. Bush had to have his war in Iraq because it puts our ability to arrive at a diplomatic solution in the Iran situation that much more difficult. And I don't think engaging Iran militarily would make sense -- it would just exacerbate an already tense problem in the most tense region of the world. The situation in Iraq would deteriorate with Iran making incursions into Iraq with many Iraqi supporting Iran’s efforts. Can we hold off until January, 2009?